Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand.

[Renatus]

You are still trying to say. That someone in the much smaller settlement of London, who sees Boudica coming, will not "hobble" over the bridge. It's not that difficult a concept ... enemy coming ... they are but a few meters from the Bridge which goes directly from the Roman settlement to the other side. A bridge that is extremely easy to defend. yet you claim they did not.

I think I see the argument.  The bridge must have been destroyed as, if it had not been, all the remaining inhabitants of London, of whatever sex, age or state of health, would have crossed to the southern side.  There they would have been safe because the rebels, despite having travelled all the way from East Anglia, sacked a colony and virtually annihilated a Roman legion, would have been incapable of crossing the 100m over the bridge and wreaking their slaughter on the other side.  This would be because the bridge would have been defended by a 'small force' - Horatius risen from the dead, perhaps, as Suetonius had abandoned the town [Sorry, this sort of playground argumentation is catching].

You will forgive me, if I say that I am not convinced.

you've gone from the Gallop down Watling street

I will give you a third piece of advice.  Go back and read my posts on this thread (it will take some effort, I admit, as you evidently have not bothered to do so, so far) and then tell me where I have ever supported the idea of 'the gallop down Watling Street'.  You will have a hard task.

The trouble with all this is that you are seeking to impose your concept of military logic upon the Romans, who simply did not think that way.  Try reading Adrian Goldsworthy's paper, as I have suggested.