A response to Colin Platt's 2007 paper 'Revisionism in Castle Studies: A Caution' does address some of the points made by Platt but mainly points out that Platts basic argument, that there is contest between military and social/symbolic ways of looking at castles and that the social/symbolic view has gone to far is a false argument. So called revisionist are not "revising" castle studies but expanding the study of castles to look beyond the architecture of a very few iconic buildings into exploring a great number of other aspects of castles, castle owners and medieval society. The picture that has arisen from looking at castles in many different ways has shown how complex and varied castle were.