Thread Rating:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand.
It is not dying - it merely sleeps, and will return in the hour of our greatest need... Wink
Nathan Ross
Reply
That's Arthurian, maybe 500 years later, but equally appropriate.
B stirs whenever any bit of 'new' evidence turns up, and may arouse with Arthur in the hour........
Then might we know where they are buried?
Davidus
Reply
Were there Romans at Bannockburn??
Last evening an interesting piece with Neil Oliver on The Bruce's defensive tactics. Involved narrowing the English attack by
digging pits lined with stakes, This seems a very cost- effective against mounted and foot troops. I wonder if this might have been used by SP against B and might modify the topographical theories?
Davidus
Reply
So much for the dead thread, pushing 30k views......

Could this be sufficiently reliable to warrant a field trip, possible to the top 10 locations?

As part of the debate I've "field tripped" to most of the credible sites, they are all so close they can be picked up in a day. Steve looks in on us occasionally so I don't want to speak out of turn, but I understand he may well be re-working his GIS project. I believe he is altering his variables, maybe to reflect some of the comments on here and at Warwick concerning the volume of water required to keep a force in the field and the total quantum of combatants on both sides. My personal view is that in a field campaign it would be hard if not impossible to be secure on the variables Steve is using, however it would be a really useful tool in pinpointing permanent settlement sites and routes.

An overall strategic view would put large negative points against his western candidates, out of range for the Iceni, and no strategic value for the Romans to defend their gains in the North West or strike at the undefended Iceni heartland.

Every tv show I see about the 8th Army has stressed how they coped in the Western Desert in WW2 on a canteen of water a day, so 9 litres per man for Paulinus still seems way over the top considering it wasn't even a siege position, merely a camp. So the real water consumption may well have been so low that, as a locational criteria, it would be close to irrelavent, this is a major pitfall for Steves process. Water courses are probably more significant as transport/navigation routes in this context.

If you take Steve's slope criteria the only candidate site that passes muster is CS, but CS isn't even in his long list due to distance from water.

I think the GIS process may throw up some new candidates but the current process of "identify a site and test it" seems the only realistic way forward. Mancetter has been tested archaeologically and there has been "no evidence of a battle", Paulerspury has been detectored with no evidence and the bodies were C14'd to Anglo Saxon so no proof or reinforcement of theory found there. Dunstable was subject to detector and literature searches last year and I assume this is ongoing in 2014. I have heard of no finds of note yet, but nothing has been published so there may be something there. I know of no formal plans to test CS yet, but I think that would be the process that would need to be followed, going down the list to eliminate candidates. So the GIS methodolgy has value in identifying new candidates as we move down the list eliminating sites we will need new candidates to eliminate. Oh hang on a minute no we won't as CS will be proven as soon as the first turf is turned :-P

re ditches and sticks, that's exactly what Paulinus deployeds at CS as the triple ditch at the Larches, killed off all chariot and mounted approaches to the heart of the Roman complex. :evil:

strangely comforting to have the thread back Sick
Reply
Quote: I believe he is altering his variables, maybe to reflect some of the comments on here and at Warwick concerning the volume of water required to keep a force in the field and the total quantum of combatants on both sides.

Every tv show I see about the 8th Army has stressed how they coped in the Western Desert in WW2 on a canteen of water a day, so 9 litres per man for Paulinus still seems way over the top considering it wasn't even a siege position, merely a camp. So the real water consumption may well have been so low that, as a locational criteria, it would be close to irrelavent, this is a major pitfall for Steves process. Water courses are probably more significant as transport/navigation routes in this context.

I would welcome a change in Steve's very thorough analysis if the water requirement as a major influencing factor is reduced. You use what is avaialble (drinking water being the imperative for man and beast) and make do.

I have said before that personal experience of the water ration in recent combat (Second Iraq War) led to many and varied ways to eke it out by re-use etc and hygiene, although very important in the field, was achieved with less than a litre of brackish water for several days (not the same as drinking water; that, on this occassion, was bottled). The water required for heating MREs (when the British Logistic Support HQ had to use them) was certainly re-used more than once and then finally, when there wasn't enough left to heat the food, it was down graded to hygiene use.
Moi Watson

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!
Reply
Quote:It is not dying - it merely sleeps, and will return in the hour of our greatest need... Wink
I'm not dead yet! Big Grin
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
Daily Mail still favours Mancetter, a good omen for all the other sites then?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...Essex.html
Reply
Quote: a good omen for all the other sites then?

Harrumph - one can only hope so. Where on earth is 'Varulanium'? :dizzy:

But that map does, I think, demonstrate the (problems with)* putting the battle anywhere around Mancetter.

*Edited to avoid the suggestion that Francis J. Haverfield (Professor of Ancient History, Oxford), R.G. Collingwood (Professor of Metaphysical Philosophy, Oxford), Graham Webster and Donald R. Dudley might have been in any way 'silly' in their hypotheses! Wink
Nathan Ross
Reply
A bit like Tacitus, they got it second hand (from The Colchester Archaeologist) and added a bit of poor research
Where is Legio II? Where is Vircnium and Varulanium??
Davidus
Reply
Oh Nathan! Are we anoraks?
Davidus
Reply
LEG II AVG were, as stated about 20 pages prior, very thin on the ground, spread amongst so many forts/fortlets within Dorset/Somerset/Deon and Cornwall, that they were no longer a comprehensive fighting unit.
There is proof of some form of unrest that needed subduing, by the locals, both at Cadbury hill fort and Ham hill.
Kevin
Kevin
Reply
Kevin, You clearly are much better informed than I am. I actually meant where were they in the Daily Mail illustration? But hopefully, the DM has breathed some recent life into this thread when others have failed.
Davidus
Reply
were all rebellious Iron Age Hillforts have their names associated with food products? could factor that into the GIS modelling?
Did Nathan just call Webster silly? :o :o :o :o :o
Reply
Quote:Oh Nathan! Are we anoraks?

Surely not. We merely prefer some degree of accuracy in media reporting. Or does this amount to the same thing? :-)
Nathan Ross
Reply
I submit to the power of the "press". After all, they must be correct.......Smile
Kevin
Kevin
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: