Otherwise, maybe old military maps might be a fruitful source of information so maybe try researching under French military topographical engineering. Quite a tough challenge - best of luck!
This is not a topographical map, but it may be useful nonetheless. It's from David Chandler, A Guide to the Battlefields of Europe (1965) and I do not know how reliable it is.
[attachment=8001]chalons.jpg[/attachment]
Jona Lendering Relevance is the enemy of history My website
These are some likely locations i've found, thanks to the map John provided:
South-West of Troyes: This one is the only one that really has the steep slope associated with the battle.
[attachment=8002]Ridge1.jpg[/attachment]
South-East of Pouan (This one I find more likely due to archaeological finds, considering the Huns were retreating East than it would be close to the Treasure of Pouan, and Roberts Plumbata find could indicate a skirmish that took place a day or two before arriving at Pouan/Arcis)
I can't even Imagine how much I would love to just visit the fields, let alone try and find an artefact. However its likely the majority of artefacts would have been uncovered and sold/scrapped/melted down by farmers over the past 1500 years.
You might want to look at the area of La Cheppe also - the elevations are not massively high thereabouts but there is an Iron Age hill fort immediately to the West known locally as "le Camp d'Attila". It's just local folklore but it is nearer Chalons than Arcis, so may not be a million kilometres away from the site of the 5th C battle.
The hillfort is clearly visible on the Google maps satellite view - on the ground, it is a big forested circle populated by large annoying flies in the summer! Sadly for battlefield hunters, the name seems to date from the 19th C!:
I guess the resource you really need is a road map overlaid on a physical map. I found this which is a map of roads in Gaul but I am not sure how comprehensive it is.
As it happens, La Cheppe is close to a road, as is Chalons itself (a different road). Given the need to assemble two large forces, one would assume a site pretty close to a trunk route with the road passing close to the necessary area of high ground. If the Huns were still largely cavalry-based (I think this is the general consensus, although I recall A Ferrill in "The Fall of the Roman Empire: the Military Explanation", (1986) thought that after a century in the Hungarian plain, they might be more infantry-based given the reduced grazing area compared to the Eurasian steppe - but this theory was based on the idea that each rider still needed long string of remounts, perhaps unnecessary in Western Europe), a nice flat piece of open ground would have suited them best.
So, a big flat bit next to a smaller steep bit near a road would get my vote!
Based on the Euratlas site it looks like they took the Road from Orleans to Sens, then north to Chailey and then East to Morains.
Then they fought on the ridge from Avize to Vertus, which is over 8 kilometers long and could have supported Aetius' Army. It's only 20 klicks from Chalons-en-Champagne too. It looks like there was once a River that ran alongside the road on the south end of the ridge. I would certainly investigate that ridge.
Or they went East to Sens and then East to Troyes, and fought on the Eastern part of that ridge running from North to South. That ridge is over 15 kilometers long, and has a river running along the road on the North side of the ridge.
The Huns themselves, and possibly the Akatziri, were light cavalry, possibly with some lancers. The majority of their subjects were infantrymen, which meant that their army would have been predominately infantry.
EDIT:
Furthermore, Jordanes states:
"The battle field was a plain rising by a sharp slope to a ridge"
The key word there is "A". Attila had retreated to the plains below, hoping the Romans would take to the field on flat ground. However, if you look at the ridge at Avize to Vertus, the area goes gradually up on the west side, and sharply on the east side. The Romans were able to gain the higher ground quicker because they didn't have to march up so steep a slope, and Attila must have been farther away from the ridge when they followed the road to Champagne. The ridge was not two steep sides, it was one steep side, with the plain rising sharply to a ridge, and a gradual side.
I believe the Battle took place 20 kilometers outside Chalons near Avize and Vertus. It is very logical based on the location of the Road, a small stream (it does not seem to exist anymore though), and the steepness of the ridge on the East side (Attila would have faced west in the Battle).
I have an article describing the Battle of Chalons from a book "Famous and Decisive Battles of the World by Brigadier-General Charles King, U.S.V. which was written in 1904 and so some of the spelling is different he mentions that the battle took place on the Marne near the vicinity of 2 present day villages Cuperly & Chape (could Chape be La Cheppe?). His dispositions seem to be reversed to the order of battle in the David Chandler map. Just thought it might be worth reading from a 19th Century point of view. Interesting that in dispositions Alans are in the centre but slightly forward of Allied lines. Knowing very little about the battle I cannot vouch for accuracy of description but it is a good read. Interesting that the map from David Chandler's book has battle taking place with the Seine river behind Attila's lines yet Charles King says battle took place on the Marne River.
[attachment=8031]chalons.pdf[/attachment]
Regards
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
"And he went to the plain of Moirey and got ready for battle. And hearing this, they made manful preparations to meet him.... "
Moirey sounds exactly like Pierre-Morains, right next to where I have proposed the site of the battle AND a town in the Roman era.
I have the original Latin text, and he lists it as "Mauriacum Campum" - is there any known reference to a town called Mauriacus and its relation to Morains?
Here is a link I found by googling, speculating on possible sites for battle. But it is from an old book. But I think Moirey is a different village to Pierre Morains. There is a village called Moirey-Flabas-Crépion in Meuse Department while Pierre Morains is in Marne department in France. But there are probably many villages and small towns with similar sounding names like La Cheppe, Cheppes-la-prairie, Chepy etc. but looking through the maps and seeing some of the names like Sedan, Verdun & Ardennes it becomes apparent that if not the local vicinities, but the overall area has been a preferred invasion route in & out of France for centuries. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ga...oteB*.html
Regards
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
Hi Evan I know your paper is nearly done and dusted so forgive me for bringing this point up at this late stage. My next problem was what thread should I use to discuss this so sorry if I chose wrong thread. By the few accounts of the battle that I have read Attila, while retreating after his unsuccessful siege of Orleans with the Allies pursuing him, chose to make a stand at Chalons because he thought that the plain would suit his horsemen. What I can’t understand is if he chose the battleground how could he not have noticed the rising ground earlier and taken steps to occupy this ground? Why didn’t his scouts inform him of the rise so he could beat the Romans to it? His army, while besieging Orleans, would have stripped the surrounding countryside bare so food and supplies for his forces would have been scarce, there are numerous examples of sieges where the besiegers are in a worse state than the besieged who at least have taken the precaution of stockpiling food & having ready access to water & this could have limited his army’s fighting effectiveness. If his army was in a bad state his retreat would have been slow with his forces, burdened with wagons of loot from the season’s raid through Gaul, would have been divided by necessity to obtain supplies. (March divided, fight united) I assume that the Allied forces were divided as well, approaching from different routes as there would be nothing left by the retreating Huns.
Could the skirmish between the Franks and the Gepids the night before the battle recorded by Jordanes indicate the first contact between the two armies and have something to do with why the battle was to be decided at Chalons rather than Attila choosing this area because he thought the location suited his army’s style of warfare? Anyway in either case he was out-generaled by Aetius who obviously saw the advantage of the ridge & took it first. If the forces for both sides were dispersed then the location would have to have crossroads or in the absence of roads, routes or avenues of approach so maybe the site suited both leaders as they awaited their various forces to converge watching each other cautiously as their respective forces built up. I have read where the battle was held late in the afternoon because Attila wanted to cover a retreat in case things went badly for his army which to me indicates that he wasn't confident of victory but he could have been realistic about the state of his forces and was just being cautious or did tribal politics in his coalition come into play after this skirmish & force the decision to fight at Chalons. I am only surmising of course with no evidence to back it up.
Regards
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
illy:
