Thread Rating:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand.
John,
I have been viewing to your 'Stalking Boudicca' recordings again and am intrigued by your comment that someone claimed to have spoken to Graham Webster and said that Webster confessed to not actually believing in Mancetter as the site of the battle. Who was this and is it in print anywhere?
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
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q-jGLIiHGs&t=31s

I don't believe it was put into print, the statement was made at the 2013 Warwick University conference (On Boudiccas Trail https://www.academia.edu/12774243/On_Bou...ast_battle ) by the Clifton on Dunsmore team of Chris Kinsella and Kerry Sullivan during their presentation. I can't recall if it was Chris or Kerry, nor whether it was first of second hand, I got the impression it was first hand. I have heard it at another time and will scan old emails to find it. 

Chris/Kerry if you are on here please chip in......

Addendum, this is in their 2013 paper and points to a pers com from Webster;

   

   
Reply
I saved the Sullivan and Kinsella webpage on Boudica in 2009. They wrote:

"The noted archaeologist Jack Lucas, currently excavating Tripontium, the Roman road station on Watling Street near Rugby, thinks Mancetter is an unlikely site. He argued with Webster, his friend and mentor that the Romans needed to secure reinforcements, supplies and communications from the rear. Lucas believes the battlefield was to the east of the Fosse Way. Webster privately admitted to Lucas that his identification of Mancetter was weak and was intended to provoke debate."

Regards, Steve Kaye
Reply
(05-20-2020, 08:42 AM)Steve Kaye Wrote: I saved the Sullivan and Kinsella webpage on Boudica in 2009. They wrote:

"The noted archaeologist Jack Lucas, currently excavating Tripontium, the Roman road station on Watling Street near Rugby, thinks Mancetter is an unlikely site. He argued with Webster, his friend and mentor that the Romans needed to secure reinforcements, supplies and communications from the rear.  Lucas believes the battlefield was to the east of the Fosse Way. Webster privately admitted to Lucas that his identification of Mancetter was weak and was intended to provoke debate."

Regards, Steve Kaye
Thanks for this Steve, it's a shame that we don't have Webster or Lucas around to lift this beyond "hearsay" although it sounds reasonable to me making it closer to a grounded fact than most of the material we have to work with in this game. I think Lucas makes an obvious point about the Fosse Way, but I know others don't; https://www.archaeology.co.uk/articles/o...-lucas.htm
Reply
Did Lucas put his 'east of the Fosse Way' theory into print?
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
Renatus Wrote:Did Lucas put his 'east of the Fosse Way' theory into print?

I can answer my own question. It appears as Appendix 3 in Sullivan and Kinsella's 2013 publication 'Boudica's Last Battle'.
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
Knowing what we now do of Webster's opinion of Mancetter, the tongue-in-cheek comment in Dudley & Webster 'The Rebellion of Boudicca' (p.152), 'The British antiquary clings firmly to the belief that all historical events can be placed on the map, and that most of them happened in his own county . . . The present authors, it will be seen, follow the tradition of the British antiquary', may be interpreted as an invitation to others to take a less parochial attitude and to look further afield for the site of the battle. Unfortunately, despite caveats in their text (p.74) - 'It is a suggestion, no more'; ' . . . with due caution' - many subsequent commentators seem to have accepted their identification of Mancetter as the battle site at face value and not to have troubled themselves to look elsewhere.
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
I blame that Michael Wood bloke, he seemed pretty emphatic in 1980..... who would ever think to challenge St. Michael..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FlbP20Ex9c&t=1837s
Reply
(05-21-2020, 07:36 PM)John1 Wrote: he seemed pretty emphatic in 1980..... [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FlbP20Ex9c&t=1837s][/url]

Ha, yes! Michael Wood's great - the flares, the sheepskin jacket, the air of intensely hip earnestness... TV productions of today are so lacklustre by comparison. [Image: wink.png]

But I think you're right about him being the source for a lot of the popular mythology too:

"Meanwhile, Governor Suetonius Paulinus was riding hell for leather, day and night, for London... The place is called Mancetter..."

The best bit, though, is at 28.50:

"... in fulfillment of some religious ritual demanded by the druids. Which brings us... to these!" - and he reaches off camera and comes back holding two skulls. And you know that somebody was just standing there with the skulls, waiting to hand them to him! It's almost Shatneresque.
Nathan Ross
Reply
Nathan Ross Wrote:Ha, yes! Michael Wood's great - the flares, the sheepskin jacket,

I recall a comedy programme at the time satirising his 'In Search of . . .' series as 'In Search of a Tighter Pair of Jeans'.

EDIT: Or it might have been Private Eye.
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
But it is fascinating to track the evolution of an historical factoid (the idea that Suetonius Paulinus went on a 'hell for leather' recon expedition to London, then rejoined his troops in the Midlands):

Initially suggested by Francis Haverfield c.1900, mentioned in print by Charles Oman in 1910, developed by Donald Dudley and Graham Webster in 1962, further developed (along with the Mancetter site) by Webster alone in 1978, popularised on TV by Michael Wood in 1980 and by Peter Snow in 2004, and subsequently adopted as fact by any number of enthusiasts and historians, including the majority of those commenting on the subject to this day...
Nathan Ross
Reply
I heard/read an alternative in the last few days in the new Northants book. The new theory was that Paulinus sped to London by boat. Then presumably having made his assessment legged it north to join his legions who were moving southward along Watling Street. Not a theory that had occurred to me before but interesting and less saddle sore. In order to take on Mona he must have had some good floatie boatie stuff at his disposal and it puts a spanner in the timeline stuff.

"Dio states that he sailed from Mona, which may explain how he got to Londinium safely when most of the surrounding area was ravaged by Boudicca's forces." The Battles and Battlefields of Northamptonshire Ingram & Evans. 2020.

"Now it chanced that Paulinus had already brought Mona to terms, and so on learning of the disaster in Britain he at once set sail thither from Mona. " Cassius Dio Epitome of Book LXII 8

Seems odd we haven't discussed this before .... any thoughts on Roman naval speed around the south coast?

240 mile march or 680 mile sail to London ????

6 knots = 7 mph = 4 days sailing to London?

Legion 18 miles per day = 13 days to London?

horseback 40 miles per day = 6 days to London (Cavalry Dash)?

Dio and his boat is starting to look plausible to me....

London to Church Stowe on horse 64 miles = 1 day full tilt. = 5 days total including the 4 day sailing option

Mona to Church Stowe at Legion pace = 180/18 = 10 days for legion
Mona to Church Stowe at Cavalry pace = 180/40 =4.5 days

So cavalry from Mona and Paulinus from London via Boat and fast horse to Church Stowe= same timeline.....
Reply
(05-22-2020, 08:05 PM)John1 Wrote: Paulinus sped to London by boat.

Good God No!!

Dio says he left Mona by boat because he knows Anglesey is an island, so naturally he needed to get back to the mainland.

Absolutely no part of "Suetonius Paulinus... was naturally inclined to delay, and a man who preferred cautious and well-reasoned plans to chance success..." or"Suetonius... with wonderful resolution, marched amidst a hostile population to Londinium... Uncertain whether he should choose it as a seat of war" suggests anyone going anywhere by boat. Still less "he receiv[ed] into his army all who would go with him" - what's he going to do, offer them all a seat in his boat?

Quite apart from the likelihood of there being any Roman naval presence in the Irish sea at that point (very minimal), travel by sea was perilous and often very slow, with the sailor at the mercy of winds and tides. The idea of the governor of Britain setting off on a boating trip down the uncharted Irish sea, aiming for London, with his province in turmoil and his army on the road is... well, fanciful is putting it mildly!


(05-22-2020, 08:05 PM)John1 Wrote: cavalry from Mona and Paulinus from London via Boat and fast horse to Church Stowe= same timeline.....

There is no need for either timeline. Paulinus marched to London with his army, as our sources tell us. No boats or galloping horses required!
Nathan Ross
Reply
The Ross doth protest too much...... in  a half hour snap judgement;

Was taking a ferry over the full 220m of the Menai Straight really worthy of commentary in Dio?
Was the Roman Navy really so poor?
Would the Mona action have taken place without Naval support?
Would the occupiers of Britain not have recce'd the island enough to run through the Irish sea basin (crewed by locals)?
Would the naval route not be the best if the land lubber province was in turmoil?
Would Paulinus really have been so cautious as a military man capable of all he had and would achieve?
Getting on a boat then marching through enemy country could well be seen as the wonderful resolution couldn't it?
His army did indeed go south with him, both headed south and met up, not necessarily holding hands....

Are you reverting to Literalist Paradista?
Reply
We did consider Dio's reference to Paulinus taking ship back in October 2012. As Nathan mentions, Dio knew that Mona was an island and, therefore, assumed that it would be necessary to sail to the mainland. He need not have known that there was only a narrow channel between the two. Nothing in our sources suggests that Paulinus' journey to London was anything other than overland and the details that Nathan quotes actively militate against anything else. We have, I hope, satisfied ourselves that there was no cavalry dash. Let's not allow ourselves to be seduced into thinking that there was a naval dash instead.
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


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Armchair Wall walking mcbishop 3 3,483 01-11-2012, 03:22 AM
Last Post: Vindex

Forum Jump: