03-07-2021, 10:09 AM
Nathan wrote:
Besides, by facing north-east like this the Romans have surrendered the high ground to the enemy. If the Britons were up in the north-west, the Romans could occupy the saddle of land and force them to attack uphill, rather than pulling back into the depression.
If the Roman line is where I placed it at the bottom of the slope from Pitstone Hill, the Brythons have what appears to be the advantage and can charge easily downhill. I think this is what SP wanted.
The trick was to ensure that the Brythons didn’t feel that they were enclosed or trapped and were totally in command of the situation in order that they would come onto the battlefield and attack.
In other words Seutonius Paulinus’ challenge was to turn what was normally a disadvantage into an advantage.
The clue may be in the speech that SP gives to his men prior to the battle “Only close up the ranks, and having discharged your javelins, then with shields and swords continue the work of bloodshed and destruction, without a thought of plunder. When once the victory has been won, everything will be in your power."
I believe that his intention was to attack so ferociously that the Brythons would turn back on themselves to withdraw swiftly as normal but because they were trying to retreat uphill and they were hemmed in by the terrain they were slaughtered as they turned to flee. The siting of the wagons causing a blockage at the entrance was a bonus for the Roman army.
Nathan wrote:
I think this is the tricky 'faucibus' causing problems again! The text either says that the position was in a defile or approached by a defile, depending on the translation, but does not say both.
Faucibus appears to translate variously, “passes, throats, dock, isthmus”.
So it could be that the site is approached by an isthmus. Now typically we would think of an isthmus as being a land bridge between two bodies of water but it could (as I believe the case is here) that it is a link between two levels from the Aylesbury plain up to the site of the battle.
I agree that later (after the site has been accessed) the Roman army is in a defile (question: why does Tacitus not use “faucibus” to describe this defile?) but then the army “clings to the defile” before charging out of the defile onto the battle field.
My point is that they cannot be in two places at once. Therefore there must be an access point into a plain(the battle site) through a form of narrow entrance but also a defile off that same plain that the roman army can use as giving the protection of a rampart.
Besides, by facing north-east like this the Romans have surrendered the high ground to the enemy. If the Britons were up in the north-west, the Romans could occupy the saddle of land and force them to attack uphill, rather than pulling back into the depression.
If the Roman line is where I placed it at the bottom of the slope from Pitstone Hill, the Brythons have what appears to be the advantage and can charge easily downhill. I think this is what SP wanted.
The trick was to ensure that the Brythons didn’t feel that they were enclosed or trapped and were totally in command of the situation in order that they would come onto the battlefield and attack.
In other words Seutonius Paulinus’ challenge was to turn what was normally a disadvantage into an advantage.
The clue may be in the speech that SP gives to his men prior to the battle “Only close up the ranks, and having discharged your javelins, then with shields and swords continue the work of bloodshed and destruction, without a thought of plunder. When once the victory has been won, everything will be in your power."
I believe that his intention was to attack so ferociously that the Brythons would turn back on themselves to withdraw swiftly as normal but because they were trying to retreat uphill and they were hemmed in by the terrain they were slaughtered as they turned to flee. The siting of the wagons causing a blockage at the entrance was a bonus for the Roman army.
Nathan wrote:
I think this is the tricky 'faucibus' causing problems again! The text either says that the position was in a defile or approached by a defile, depending on the translation, but does not say both.
Faucibus appears to translate variously, “passes, throats, dock, isthmus”.
So it could be that the site is approached by an isthmus. Now typically we would think of an isthmus as being a land bridge between two bodies of water but it could (as I believe the case is here) that it is a link between two levels from the Aylesbury plain up to the site of the battle.
I agree that later (after the site has been accessed) the Roman army is in a defile (question: why does Tacitus not use “faucibus” to describe this defile?) but then the army “clings to the defile” before charging out of the defile onto the battle field.
My point is that they cannot be in two places at once. Therefore there must be an access point into a plain(the battle site) through a form of narrow entrance but also a defile off that same plain that the roman army can use as giving the protection of a rampart.
Deryk
