04-12-2010, 09:46 AM
I've always been quite curious about this... (taken from wikipedia)
"It is said that the Roman Legions took no part in the battle, being held in reserve throughout. According to Tacitus, 10,000 Caledonian lives were lost at a cost of only 360 auxiliary troops."
Is there any other sources that we know of that could DISPROVE this? like the actual legions casualty reports or strength reports?
Althought very very small... could it well be the case ? as the Caledonian's were mostly farmers and not warriors? as we know in most battles the majority of casualties happen when an army routes? could it be that the warriors of the caledonian's realised very early in the fight that they were screwed??
"It is said that the Roman Legions took no part in the battle, being held in reserve throughout. According to Tacitus, 10,000 Caledonian lives were lost at a cost of only 360 auxiliary troops."
Is there any other sources that we know of that could DISPROVE this? like the actual legions casualty reports or strength reports?
Althought very very small... could it well be the case ? as the Caledonian's were mostly farmers and not warriors? as we know in most battles the majority of casualties happen when an army routes? could it be that the warriors of the caledonian's realised very early in the fight that they were screwed??
Lucius Duccius Rufinus Aka Kevin Rhynas.
"Fortes fortuna adiuvat".
[url:10c24pem]http://www.ninthlegion.co.uk[/url]
[size=75:10c24pem](work in progress...)[/size]
"Fortes fortuna adiuvat".
[url:10c24pem]http://www.ninthlegion.co.uk[/url]
[size=75:10c24pem](work in progress...)[/size]
