02-18-2023, 03:04 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-04-2023, 01:10 PM by John1.
Edit Reason: added Bowden's territory definition
)
Fascinating and refreshing read Alan, thanks.
I find myself agreeing with your points, almost across the board. I would like to extend the debate a little based on your conclusions.
I am hoping to illustrate this observation a little:
"I see the battle somewhere around the western side of Iceni territory possibly not far from St Albans or between St Albans and the Northern Frontier forts (Lincoln?)"
I am a fan of Keith Briggs' map site on the basis that it hones in on the relationship between Roman roads and terrain. I have utilised his map here to illustrate the battlefield search corridor you conclude with above.
Keith's maps can be found here:
https://keithbriggs.info/Roman_road_maps.html
V= Verulamium (your southern limit)
A = Ancaster (a reasonable proxy for Lindum, for map image reasons)
CS = Church Stowe (because I am completely and utterly biased about this debate)
Red N/S line = approximate western boundary of Iceni Trinovanti
The tribal boundaries currently mapped have always seemed a little odd to me. The Iceni Northern boundary is traditionally shown along the Nene. I have truncated this just east of Water Newton. My own personal view is that the Western boundaries of the Iceni and Trinovanti are more likely to run to the Cambridge, Godmanchester, Water Newton line, and I see no reason that, to the North, they would stop short of the Welland's course through the Fens.
During his talk to the Battlefields Trust (4th March 2023) prof Will Bowden presented the Iceni territory as encompassing all of the present counties of Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire. I know it's a bit messy using contemporary boundaries, but he did.... and that puts the closest Iceni territory only 30 miles from the Church Stowe candidate battle site....
The map delimits the search area very well and emphasises, at least to me, the significance of the "Midlands Massif" and it's proximity to the Iceni's northern and western borders. The Valleys incised into this massif are distinct but the vast majority lead to SW/NE trending ridges, ridges whose tops and flanks provide firm footings for transportation routes, routes that were fairly obviously paralleled by the meandering courses of the Ouse, Nene and Welland. Routes that connected the Iceni deep into the Midland core of Britannia.
I think the definition of "defile" is clear and the target site has to lie between two areas of relatively higher ground, the incised valleys provide many such defiles but very few that are secured by isolated topography, most being connected by easily traversable ridge top routes. However Tacitus makes this isolation a function of long lost vegetation (which I assume to be dense wet woodland) rather than the topographic advantage CS leads with.
Taking your observations, combined with Upex's theory of the Nene frontier and the potential jumping off line/depot for the Mona campaign along the line of what became Watling Street does give me encouragement for the Church Stowe case.
Once again thanks for the food for though Alan.
I find myself agreeing with your points, almost across the board. I would like to extend the debate a little based on your conclusions.
I am hoping to illustrate this observation a little:
"I see the battle somewhere around the western side of Iceni territory possibly not far from St Albans or between St Albans and the Northern Frontier forts (Lincoln?)"
I am a fan of Keith Briggs' map site on the basis that it hones in on the relationship between Roman roads and terrain. I have utilised his map here to illustrate the battlefield search corridor you conclude with above.
Keith's maps can be found here:
https://keithbriggs.info/Roman_road_maps.html
V= Verulamium (your southern limit)
A = Ancaster (a reasonable proxy for Lindum, for map image reasons)
CS = Church Stowe (because I am completely and utterly biased about this debate)
Red N/S line = approximate western boundary of Iceni Trinovanti
The tribal boundaries currently mapped have always seemed a little odd to me. The Iceni Northern boundary is traditionally shown along the Nene. I have truncated this just east of Water Newton. My own personal view is that the Western boundaries of the Iceni and Trinovanti are more likely to run to the Cambridge, Godmanchester, Water Newton line, and I see no reason that, to the North, they would stop short of the Welland's course through the Fens.
During his talk to the Battlefields Trust (4th March 2023) prof Will Bowden presented the Iceni territory as encompassing all of the present counties of Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire. I know it's a bit messy using contemporary boundaries, but he did.... and that puts the closest Iceni territory only 30 miles from the Church Stowe candidate battle site....
The map delimits the search area very well and emphasises, at least to me, the significance of the "Midlands Massif" and it's proximity to the Iceni's northern and western borders. The Valleys incised into this massif are distinct but the vast majority lead to SW/NE trending ridges, ridges whose tops and flanks provide firm footings for transportation routes, routes that were fairly obviously paralleled by the meandering courses of the Ouse, Nene and Welland. Routes that connected the Iceni deep into the Midland core of Britannia.
I think the definition of "defile" is clear and the target site has to lie between two areas of relatively higher ground, the incised valleys provide many such defiles but very few that are secured by isolated topography, most being connected by easily traversable ridge top routes. However Tacitus makes this isolation a function of long lost vegetation (which I assume to be dense wet woodland) rather than the topographic advantage CS leads with.
Taking your observations, combined with Upex's theory of the Nene frontier and the potential jumping off line/depot for the Mona campaign along the line of what became Watling Street does give me encouragement for the Church Stowe case.
Once again thanks for the food for though Alan.
