Thread Rating:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand.
Quote:some aerial support from the east according to Google maps

Ah, the famous British currus volans, no doubt...


Quote:Could a Moderator be so kind as do so, please? Thank you.

If it can be done easily then yes, please do!
Nathan Ross
Reply
Quote:If it can be done easily then yes, please do!
I think I've seen it done but, failing that, we could open a new topic and copy the posts to it as quotes.
Michael King Macdona

And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
Reply
To the Latin scholars amongst you:

The words "defile" that is stated..... what exactly does it mean? What is the Latin translation and cannot it be defined from the original context).

Is it a narrpw and deep valley with steep high sides on both sides (Dorking, Church Stowe, Ogbourne St George) or a more graduated valley with high sides on one or both sides? (Bagshot Heath, Dunstable, Cunetio).

Kind Regards - Deryk
Deryk
Reply
Quote:The words "defile" that is stated..... what exactly does it mean? What is the Latin translation and cannot it be defined from the original context)

We've definitely been here before! This post and following, for example, discussing faucibus. I think angustias is also important - and angustias loci more specifically.

A defile, a pass, a 'throat', an entry-way, a gulley, a confined space or saddle between hills - any of these would be acceptable, I think. But it's not an exact geographical term, so doesn't really help with interpretation in more than a general sense.
Nathan Ross
Reply
Thanks Nathan....

Sorry about that...

Kind Regards - Deryk
Deryk
Reply
I agree with Nathan. Tacitus describes Paulinus selecting a position "in a narrow defile" (artis faucibus). Faucibus appears to be the ablative of fauces, a feminine noun used in the plural in prose, although poets apparently used it in the singular but only in the ablative (fauce). It means 'throat', 'pharynx' or 'gullet' or, when applied to a place, 'pass', 'defile', 'ravine', 'chasm', 'inlet' or 'outlet' or, in naval terms, 'strait' or 'sound'. It evidently means something passed through or along and seems always to carry connotations of narrowness. Tacitus emphasizes this by the use of the adjective artus, -a, -um, meaning, in this context, 'narrow' or 'confined', although it can also mean 'short'. This is confirmed by his later comment about the army “keeping the narrowness of the place as protection” (angustias loci pro munimento retinens).
Michael King Macdona

And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
Reply
Back to page 18, it was only September.....

I have now found you can buy 2m LIDAR date for much of the country from the Environment Agency, a 1km grid square is £10 for non-commercial use;
https://www.geomatics-group.co.uk/geocms/Order.aspx
Reply
I have added a couple of paragraphs to the 'Aftermath' section of my summary here. I thought it better that a complete summary should appear in one post, rather than being spread over different ones.
Michael King Macdona

And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
Reply
Quote:I have added a couple of paragraphs to the 'Aftermath' section

Very good - thanks!


Quote:The Twentieth and Fourteenth Legions were granted the cognomina of Valeria Victrix and Martia Victrix respectively... It is possible, however, that it could have been because their role in Paulinus’ Anglesey campaign.

Possibly, although there is the note in Histories that the Fourteenth had 'particularly distinguished itself by quelling the revolt in Britain' and 'Nero had added to their reputation by selecting them as his most effective troops' (rebellione Britanniae compressa. addiderat gloriam Nero eligendo ut potissimos - Histories II.11). Later, in Batavia, Cerialis calls the Fourteenth 'the Conquerors of Britain' (domitores Britanniae quartadecimanos appellans - V.16), which is rather ironic coming from him!

So it would seem that the crushing of the rebellion was celebrated, and the Fourteenth at least were famed for it. Whether this also involved granting them additional names is unknown but not unlikely I think.

On the other hand, the 'conquerors of Britain' bit might refer to the long preceding campaign in Wales and Anglesey, as you suggest - with the northern frontier held by the Brigantian client state, the conquest of Wales might indeed have seemed (from Rome!) like the last stage of the total domination of the island; if the Fourteenth were prominent in it (and Paulinus's reliance on them in AD61 might suggest they were his favoured legion) then the cognomina might have been earned there.

When's the earliest date for the name 'Valeria Victrix', incidentally? Might these titles have been won during Agricola's northern campaigns? That way, the Fourteenth alone could have been honoured for the rebellion, which frees the Second to join the main body of the Twentieth in Wales and solves the mystery of the missing legate!

Have you seen David Hall's article in Ancient Warfare I.3? He makes some interesting arguments about the background and aftermath of the revolt specifically. In Hall's view, the scale and importance of the uprising have been enormously exaggerated, both by Roman writers and modern historians. In fact, he believes, Boudica had no hope of success and her rebellion collapsed at the first real challenge. The note in Suetonius about Nero thinking of withdrawing the army from Britain 'lacks a context', and therefore might apply to any period of his reign and not necessarily to the revolt - 'its significance remains problematic'...

:-)
Nathan Ross
Reply
Malone implies the VV may have post dated the campaign considerably;

"It seems clear that the Fourteenth Legion gained it’s titles Martia Victrix in recognition of this victory over the Iceni. The apparent parallel of the titles Valeria Victrix suggests the possibility that the Twentieth received this honorific for it’s contribution. However the Legion was not present in full strength and Ritterling was firmly of the opinion that such honorifics were bestowed upon the Aquila as the personification of the legion and could not be won by a mere vexillation, but only if the entire legion had earned the glory. The discovery of precisely dates document at Carlisle in which the cognomina are omitted raises the possibility that as at 7 Nov 83, legio XX had yet to receive the award. A later, Agricolan, context is possible and will be considered in more detail below……”
(Malone - Legio XX Valeria Victrix BAR S1491 2006, pg42)

The Carlisle ref is Tomblin 1992 "The Twentieth Legion at Wroxeter and Carlisle in the First Century: The Epigrahic Evidence" Britannia 23, 141-58
Reply
Quote:When's the earliest date for the name 'Valeria Victrix', incidentally? Might these titles have been won during Agricola's northern campaigns?
In the article that I cited, R. McPake convincingly argued against the Twentieth Legion having any cognomina before the time of the revolt but, as to their introduction, could say only that abbreviations for 'Valeria Victrix' appear on inscriptions from the late 1st century onwards. He noted that the Fourteenth had acquired the title of 'Martia Victrix' by AD66 (CIL III, 395) and concluded that the similarity between the two titles indicated that they were bestowed at the same time and that the occasion was likely to be the suppression of the Boudican revolt.

His principal concern was to establish that the Twentieth's cognomina did not appear before AD61; Roger Tomlin, in the article cited by John1, dealt with the date of their introduction. Without rehearsing his arguments in detail, let me state my understanding of his main conclusions. There are over a hundred inscriptions in Britain naming the Legion and, excluding doubtful cases and those too damaged to assist, there are 96 in which it is possible to ascertain whether or not the cognomina are referred to. Of these, only eight omit them. One is Severan or later and another is an informal building stone. All the remaining six are early and, of these, only two are clearly dateable to post-AD61 – RIB 293 (Wroxeter), AD66-86, and RIB 502 (Chester), soon after AD86. Looking further afield, he follows D. Kennedy, 'C. Velius Rufus', Britannia 14 (1983), 183-196, in the dating of ILS 9200 (Heliopolis/Baalbek) which places Rufus' command of a task force including a vexillation from XX Vic(trix) in AD89, making this "the earliest dated instance of the cognomina". He concludes that the cognomina 'Valeria Victix' are well attested in inscriptions from immediately after AD86, but not before. However, the position is not clear-cut because of the difficulty in dating some inscriptions that may be earlier and the possibility that the cognomina may have been omitted on others by accident or design. RIB 502 is anomalous whether the cognomina were awarded in 61 or 84 and prompts the question whether they might have been similarly omitted from RIB 293, notwithstanding that they were current. As to the Carlisle document, he raises the possibility that the cognomina might have been omitted through oversight or because they were thought unnecessary, although he seems to doubt this. Nevertheless, his final conclusion is that the evidence inclines towards the title ‘Valeria Victrix’ being awarded in 61, but that it is not yet conclusive.

I remain uncertain. Ritterling’s opinion that honours could only be won by a whole legion is persuasive and militates against an award after the suppression of Boudica’s revolt. On the other hand, if one postulates the award following Agricola’s campaigns in Scotland, there is the difficulty that Tacitus’ account does not refer to any legion having particularly distinguished itself during those campaigns. Mons Graupius, in particular, was won by the auxiliaries, with the legions held in reserve.



Quote:Have you seen David Hall's article in Ancient Warfare I.3?
I had overlooked that. Having refreshed my memory, I am not convinced. He blandly assumes a withdrawal up Watling Street and, from the map, appears to subscribe to the ‘cavalry dash’ scenario and to the final battle taking place at Mancetter (at least, I assume that; the map makes it look more as if it took place near Hinckley). He also seems to misdescribe the topography of the battlefield – unless I have missed the evidence of the Britons attacking uphill. He is right that Suetonius’ claim that Nero contemplated withdrawing from Britain lacks context. Nero may well, at some stage, have thought that the province was more bother than it was worth but, if he did, we do not know when. Modern writers may have been seduced by the romantic notion of the defeated heroine but there seems little reason for Roman writers to have been similarly deceived.
Michael King Macdona

And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
Reply
Hi All

As promised I have been looking in the West for a battle site and have probably gone too far for some of you! I would like you however to keep an open mind as this is just a set of ideas....

I have reviewed the descriptions and taken on board the implications of water etc. As we all know the actual description is fairly specific and the location is not.

We have also seen that SP's comfort zone was mountain warfare and indeed the site description indicates this with the idea of a deep valley with steep and towering sides, expanding out into a plain, yet not with a river running through it. There are very few places like this either in the South East of England or the Midlands.

As you are aware I feel that SP went to Silchester down the Portway (I think that the Trinovantes were friendly).

Again I still have a soft spot for Cunetio but during my search for other places that might fit the site I was searching for Marten in Wiltshire and have stumbled across an area 15 - 20 miles or so from Silchester, near a Roman Road (Cunetio to Winchester via Andover) which does fit the descriptions -that at Fosbury Hill Fort and the valley at Hippenscombe.

Also the area between Fosbury Hill Fort Inkpen Hill, Warlbury Hill Fort and Pilot Hill also have copious sites fitting the descriptions.

This is a severely hilly area and allows for 360 degree views (especially at Warlbury) with a natural battle site at Coombe, a plain where waggons could have been pulled up, an access up a river valley from the Portway etc.......which may have suited SP.

I would value your comments......

Kind Regards - Deryk
Deryk
Reply
There are indeed plenty of suitable sites around there, and the way the Roman road takes a detour around the hill indicates that it was a recognised bit of high ground.

The problem for me would be the location - why would the battle be all the way over there? The road runs NW-SE, so to get there Paulinus (and the Britons presumably following him) would have to travel either to Andover or Mildenhall and then cut obliquely across country. Why? Where were they going? It would involve a considerable journey for both parties.

You'd also, I think, need some evidence of rebel activity on the route to the site, perhaps burning deposits. Silchester is still up in the air in this regard, of course!
Nathan Ross
Reply
Quote:The problem for me would be the location - why would the battle be all the way over there? The road runs NW-SE, so to get there Paulinus (and the Britons presumably following him) would have to travel either to Andover or Mildenhall and then cut obliquely across country. Why? Where were they going? It would involve a considerable journey for both parties.
Me, too. I still think that they went west but not so far. That said, I am rather taken with the idea of Paulinus taking the civilians to Verulamium and then striking off down Akeman Street towards the more militarized zone. I think it works well from a Roman point of view but I need a convincing reason for the Britons to go in the same direction. Any ideas?
Michael King Macdona

And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
Reply
Hi All

Renatus makes a good point.


I have found a site that ticks all the boxes and fits the scenarios, just outside Tring next to Akeman Street where the Icknield Way crosses it at Coombe Hill......

What do you think?

Kind Regards - Deryk
Deryk
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Armchair Wall walking mcbishop 3 3,481 01-11-2012, 03:22 AM
Last Post: Vindex

Forum Jump: