10-17-2021, 05:51 PM
Hanny wrote:
There are a number of problems with this comparison, first we have no date for when Harold sets out to march north, so its time frame somwhere between Sept. 12-16* to go North to Tadcaster reaching it on 24th Sept, and then moving to engage Vikings on the 25th after marching another 12 miles or so, so there is a wide range for number of days to move the distance for the mounted elements and no way to know were the Fyrds joined the march, as evidenced by those numbers being different in many books.
The article you quote states: "This epic march of 185 miles from London to Yorkshire in barely six days has become one of the heroic icons of English history", so I can live with a 2 day difference but I have to say that all the references that I have seen previously relate 4 days. Also this was not just the mounted men as they collected the East Anglian Fyrd enroute.
Interestingly the King could only keep the Fyrd in the field for around 6 weeks by law because of their farming duties.
The point I am trying to make is that armies can move far faster than 18 miles a day on a long march when it is necessary, which in this case cuts down the amount they would have to carry in food especially when you are talking about gaining supplies at the longest 4 days at Caesar Speed.
Harold was moving at least 30mpd. Julius Caesar moved at 50mpd in extremis (and actually recorded as 80mpd on occasions) with his whole army not just mounted troops but with little baggage.
These distances were acheived because although the rate of march was about 4mph both commanders extended the marching day considerably, often into the night.
I am not relying on on this speed of march to prove a point just an observation that it could be done and adds another dimension as my theory does not rely on the Iceni / Trinovantes in a race to reach London first as I dont believe it was their prime objective. Regaining and retaining their stolen land however was.
There are a number of problems with this comparison, first we have no date for when Harold sets out to march north, so its time frame somwhere between Sept. 12-16* to go North to Tadcaster reaching it on 24th Sept, and then moving to engage Vikings on the 25th after marching another 12 miles or so, so there is a wide range for number of days to move the distance for the mounted elements and no way to know were the Fyrds joined the march, as evidenced by those numbers being different in many books.
The article you quote states: "This epic march of 185 miles from London to Yorkshire in barely six days has become one of the heroic icons of English history", so I can live with a 2 day difference but I have to say that all the references that I have seen previously relate 4 days. Also this was not just the mounted men as they collected the East Anglian Fyrd enroute.
Interestingly the King could only keep the Fyrd in the field for around 6 weeks by law because of their farming duties.
The point I am trying to make is that armies can move far faster than 18 miles a day on a long march when it is necessary, which in this case cuts down the amount they would have to carry in food especially when you are talking about gaining supplies at the longest 4 days at Caesar Speed.
Harold was moving at least 30mpd. Julius Caesar moved at 50mpd in extremis (and actually recorded as 80mpd on occasions) with his whole army not just mounted troops but with little baggage.
These distances were acheived because although the rate of march was about 4mph both commanders extended the marching day considerably, often into the night.
I am not relying on on this speed of march to prove a point just an observation that it could be done and adds another dimension as my theory does not rely on the Iceni / Trinovantes in a race to reach London first as I dont believe it was their prime objective. Regaining and retaining their stolen land however was.
Deryk
