Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand.

[MonsGraupius]

The Bridge, it's just a bridge. Before the Romans turned up, there hadn't even been a bridge. For thousands of years, people had crossed the River Thames without any need for this BRIDGE.

The Thames is extremely difficult to cross, to the extent that I know the names of the two people who have attempted it (in the tidal section) in the last century, one failed to the extent they were forced to swim, the other succeeded.

In contrast, Hadrians and the Antonine wall are far easier to cross without using the gate. It is after all just a 12 foot wall, with a much lower chance of death than attempting the ford at London Bridge. So is your argument that they were not a barrier and the Romans were being silly when they built them?

Should we dismiss Hadrians wall as a mere "folly?" because according to you, if people can get through, then it is no barrier at all?

You should understand it was the Roman army and traders who needed the bridge with their heavy armour, weapons and carts, not the tribesmen.

And Boudica's army did not have carts?

The rest turned their back in flight, and flight proved difficult, because the surrounding waggons had blocked retreat. Our soldiers spared not to slay even the women, while the very beasts of burden, transfixed by the missiles, swelled the piles of bodies.

If SP had crossed the bridge then destroyed it, he would have done Boudica a favour and left himself isolated. 

Isolated?? ... in the SE of Britain amongst friendly tribes, with direct lines of supply from Rome. Are you saying if Suetonius went to Gaul he would be even more "isolated" ... and to Rome "Totally totally isolated"?

How is moving toward your own home and supplies and friendly tribes becoming "isolated"?

If you look at a map of crossing points navigable by foot from Oxford in the west to Cliffe in Kent, to the East, that is a distance of 100 miles, so unless you now start building a wall and a lot of forts I fail to see your plan.

I have studied the Thames crossing points in detail, and the few crossing points below Goring are such poor quality that they were not even considered crossing points by the Anglo Saxons who said that Wallingford was the first crossing point of the Thames.

As i once said, you will find yourself retreating across the River Medway if you are not careful. (OH No! There's another bridge over the Medway).

We are told Suetonius left London and that people were "overwhelmed" in London, which could only happen if Suetonius went south and pulled down the bridge.

And, as London was a minor settlement of no consequence, except for the bridge and the port, the only reason for him going to London was to either:

1. Take down the bridge and use the Thames as a defensive line
   
2. To secure London as a port for his supply lines
   

The galloping horseman scenarios do not include either of these objectives. No move northward explains why Suetonius came to London to secure the bridge or the port so they are all TOTALLY STUPID. The Thames is a defensive barrier as even Caesar found. Yet, suddenly the Galloping Horsemen claim it is not. How absurd!