This might be the case as I have already said in your double question. The French being 'porte en chicane'. Please see my refs for the previous question.



--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 45 mins (2011-03-05 12:36:06 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Oh well, I've spent rather too much time doing research for you this morning, so will have to wish you well and leave you to it.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 52 mins (2011-03-05 12:42:45 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Last thought: staggered entrance

The site area lies at the south-western edge of a large field just to the north of Bunkle Edge,
Berwickshire (illus 1). The earthworks included a sub-rectangular enclosure of about two hectares
which partially surrounded the Marygoldhill east fort, and a linear feature composed of a line of pits
and a flanking bank running north-westwards from the enclosure (NGR NT 8044 6049 to 8024 6070).
This incorporated a putative gateway (NT 8036 6057) with a staggered entrance (Site 2) (illus 2). The
enclosure was defined by a continuous double bank and medial ditch which converged with the linear
earthwork at the west corner (NT 8044 6049) (Site 1) (illus 3,4).
http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/PSAS_2...

The site is defined by a double-ditch system, roughly square in outline with rounded corners, bowed-out sides on the north and west, and an entrance on the east defined by a staggered break in the defensive ditches; the gap in the inner ditch being displaced to the south, that in the outer ditch to the north. The enclosure measures 285 feet from north to south by 260 ft. east-west (c.87 x 79 m) within the ditches, giving an occupation area of almost 1¾ acres (c.0.7 ha). No trace of a rampart was found in position. The ditches were found upon excavation to be of regular V-profile but varying somewhat in both width and depth; the inner ditch varied between 14½ to 8 feet in width (c.4.1 to 2.4 m) and between 6 to 4½ feet in depth (c.1.8 to 1.4 m), the outer between 9 to 6 feet in width (c.2.7 - 1.8 m) and 4 to 2 feet (c.1.2 - 0.6 m) in depth.

The original excavators classified this site "as a fort rather than a semi-permanent camp" (BAS Trans. 1944 p.12), in view of its double, V-profile ditches and approximately rectangular outline. This was a reasonable assumption for the time, but now, however, as more and more examples of Roman military works have come to light, the site is known to display quite un-military characteristics; bowed-out or irregularly-proportioned defences are sometimes seen in the larger temporary camps but are very rarely seen in permanent works, the 'staggered' entrance is also very rare in the earlier works but are known in the 3rd century on the Devon coast (e.g. at Countisbury), the great variations in construction quality of the defensive ditches is not suggestive of the Roman military mindset, and the finds, particularly the metalwork, also seem more indicative of a domestic rather than a military occupation.
http://www.roman-britain.org/places/shenstone.htm

It seems like a literal translation but this is what I found in a historical encyclopedia:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=f899xH_quaMC&pg=PA818&lpg...

I seem to recall my Arch Prof. using the phrase on a dig back in my Dark Ages. I cannot give any further info. Sorry