03-01-2015, 11:09 AM
This forum is the only one I know of that discusses the Boudican revolt, therefore I must correct some misleading statements.
Nathan Ross writes of my essay, "Of his top sites, I'd say both Dorking and Tring/Berkhamsted are pretty good. However, both appear to have a river running at right angles through the Roman front line (or perhaps on one flank, at Dorking)."
To be clear, I re-construct the river flows, velocities, widths etc. for the Summer of the Ist C. AD and use these computations in the essay to produce various factors.
Unlike Ross, I did not mistake the Grand Union Canal for a river.
Furthermore, and contrary to Ross' implication, I penalise those potential battle-sites that have rivers flowing through the front-line. See page 16 of the essay on Academia.edu:
"Effect of a river flowing through the front-line – having sufficient water nearby was undoubtedly beneficial to the Romans, but having that water flow through the front-line was not, for obvious reasons. This attribute therefore penalises such battle-sites (482 of the 862) by assigning a value of one to rivers that flowed at either end or beyond a front-line, linearly through to zero when the river flowed at the centre. Additionally, a weighting based on the width of the intruding river was also applied – the greater the width, the greater the penalty."
Steve Kaye
Nathan Ross writes of my essay, "Of his top sites, I'd say both Dorking and Tring/Berkhamsted are pretty good. However, both appear to have a river running at right angles through the Roman front line (or perhaps on one flank, at Dorking)."
To be clear, I re-construct the river flows, velocities, widths etc. for the Summer of the Ist C. AD and use these computations in the essay to produce various factors.
Unlike Ross, I did not mistake the Grand Union Canal for a river.
Furthermore, and contrary to Ross' implication, I penalise those potential battle-sites that have rivers flowing through the front-line. See page 16 of the essay on Academia.edu:
"Effect of a river flowing through the front-line – having sufficient water nearby was undoubtedly beneficial to the Romans, but having that water flow through the front-line was not, for obvious reasons. This attribute therefore penalises such battle-sites (482 of the 862) by assigning a value of one to rivers that flowed at either end or beyond a front-line, linearly through to zero when the river flowed at the centre. Additionally, a weighting based on the width of the intruding river was also applied – the greater the width, the greater the penalty."
Steve Kaye