Actually Mr. Vermaat, If you've memorized all of 5th century history like I have, you'd know that the Goths never went further north of Aquitane except on 2 occasions; once is the Battle of Chalons, the second was an attempted invasion of the Domain of Soissons. The second attempt, thanks to Aegidius and the Franks, didn't do much more than remove the population of Alans from the area along the seine basin between Amorica and Aurelianum. Aetius, Aegidius, and then the Franks all Kept the Goths confined to aquitane.
Aube is miles form Aurelainum (Orleans), so I highly doubt it was form the second invasion. Looking at a topigraphical map of the area, there is a ridge relatively nearby, but it is most likely that's not the one. There probably was a ridge at one point, but it was probably leveled to allot for farm land. You can see slight raises in the plain if you look topographically, where a ridge may have once run along the river side.
Hang on Sir......a ridge that can cope with 30,000 men would take a fair bit of levelling old chap.
Although could have got washed away by the river changes.
Will try and get hold of a decent map.
Sulpicius Florus
(aka. Steve Thompson)
"What? this old Loculus? had it years dear."
"Vescere bracis meis" (eat my shorts)
Quote:Hang on Sir......a ridge that can cope with 30,000 men would take a fair bit of levelling old chap.
Although could have got washed away by the river changes.
Will try and get hold of a decent map.
That and 1500 years of tilling the soil for farming.
Also, Alans were settled along the Loire not the seine, I get those 2 rivers mixed up. (Merobaudes Pangeyric of 439 Roughly: "A calmer man roams the Amorican wilds, Grain fields instead of the forst, aetius recruited Alans to take Amorica, etc)"
Sorry it's not very refined. I am in Sweden working and only have paint to work with.
The parch mark may/may not be it. Worth a look though.
I have no map with contour lines on it here. I have to go do some Engineering stuff at Peugeot soon so I will also try and drive past there on the way over or on the way back to Germany.
Much easier to get a feel for tactical positions on the ground.
Could you ask the locals if you get the chance about where exactly some of the finds have shown up?
Because they've found Swords and cups and other trinkets as well in the area, and those Blades could play a key role in determining the location.
EDIT: Also went on Google Earth and looked, that does appear to be some sort of road. A farmer wouldn't cross his fields like that, and when you look at the 2005 shot of the area it's still there.
Quote:Actually Mr. Vermaat, If you've memorized all of 5th century history like I have, you'd know that the Goths never went further north of Aquitane except on 2 occasions; once is the Battle of Chalons, the second was an attempted invasion of the Domain of Soissons.
Well good for you Mr Evan, but perhaps (and before you take such a condescending tone) you should realize that 5th-c. history may not cover every military move in detail. It's quite sketchy, so we might not be informed of every action the Goths took (either acting alone or as Roman federates) - but of course you know that because you've memorized it all. :wink:
How else would we get that concentration of Visigothic crossbow-brooches located in the area between Paris and the Channel, dating to 450-500, the same time when similar types are concentrated in Aquitaine. (Wieczorek, A. (1996): Identität und Integration. Zur Bevölkerungspolitik der Merowinger nach archäologischen Quellen, in: Die Franken, Wegbereiter Europas, p.353 fig. 290). By the looks of it, they belonged to Goths fighting in the Roman army of Syagrius. Like the Franks, the Goths were no monolithic ethnic block which remained concentrated in one place around one leader. Sub-groups could and did fight on opposite sides, as you could/should have known from your well-memorized 5th-c. history.
Therefore, it's not correct to automatically link the funeral site of a Visigothic noble to one single battle.
Mind you, I'm not saying that he's NOT linked to it (as you perhaps assumed I did), but I'm saying that we should remain cautious. :wink:
Robert Vermaat MODERATOR FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Magister Militum Flavius Aetius post=309876 Wrote:Actually Mr. Vermaat, If you've memorized all of 5th century history like I have, you'd know that the Goths never went further north of Aquitane except on 2 occasions; once is the Battle of Chalons, the second was an attempted invasion of the Domain of Soissons.
Well good for you Mr Evan, but perhaps (and before you take such a condescending tone) you should realize that 5th-c. history may not cover every military move in detail. It's quite sketchy, so we might not be informed of every action the Goths took (either acting alone or as Roman federates) - but of course you know that because you've memorized it all. :wink:
How else would we get that concentration of Visigothic crossbow-brooches located in the area between Paris and the Channel, dating to 450-500, the same time when similar types are concentrated in Aquitaine. (Wieczorek, A. (1996): Identität und Integration. Zur Bevölkerungspolitik der Merowinger nach archäologischen Quellen, in: Die Franken, Wegbereiter Europas, p.353 fig. 290). By the looks of it, they belonged to Goths fighting in the Roman army of Syagrius. Like the Franks, the Goths were no monolithic ethnic block which remained concentrated in one place around one leader. Sub-groups could and did fight on opposite sides, as you could/should have known from your well-memorized 5th-c. history.
Therefore, it's not correct to automatically link the funeral site of a Visigothic noble to one single battle.
Mind you, I'm not saying that he's NOT linked to it (as you perhaps assumed I did), but I'm saying that we should remain cautious. :wink:
True, I forgot that Goths were a source of syagrius.
Also, Wulfgar610 on TWC mentioned that the main ridge running through the catalaunian fields is about 30 km west of the battlesite so it's possibly lnked to chalons.
Sorry that was a hasty response which got partially cut out.
Mr. Vermaat, you are right, we don't know everything. Those brooches could have been anything from visigothic, to Equipment scavenged by the forces of Syagrius because he could not equip his own men. Who knows.
But we know the following: the three main incidencies in northern Gaul involving the Visigoths took place in 471 with Riothamus (although he might have been spain, not sure), 451 with Chalons, and 46... 3 with Aegidius and the Alans. Those incursions besides Chalons took place west of Aurelianum though, not Northeast. But you are right, I have done much research into Migration studies, and (as shown in Peter Heather's Empires and Barbarians) it's not solid Blocks of people its multiple subgroups and tribes slowly shifting as they change alliances and grow as a population group. Aetius and Attila show that perfectly, as although the Huns were not friendly, aetius did recruit Hunnic Foederati to fight for him until 439 when they were destroyed at Toulose.
It's possible there could have been foederati, but it's not likely because the recorded incidencies of goths being used as foederati were at Chalons, Stilicho's recruitment in 406 from Radagasius' attempted incursion, and in 412-416 in Spain, along with Majoran in Spain in the 460s.
About your Plumbata, can I see an image of the Plumbata itself? Because it could also possibly be from an earlier timeframe (Both 270s and 350s are likely times considering the Battle of CHalons in 274 and the Roman-Alamannic Wars in the 350s)
But there's always the possibility the Plumbata floated downstream, (I'm pretty sure the river Aube runs west) because the Treasure of Pouan was found on the south bank of the Aube River.
Also, there have been other finds besides Pouan (of which yours is noteworthy, thank you for sharing that) of Swords, cups, and Brooches in the Area of Pouan and Aube.
My friends on TWC provided some image links and other sites regarding the finds (I don't speak french, only English and Latin) and I've asked my Latin Teacher (She's a professor and has a PHD in roman history) if she can help with acquiring more information about archaeological finds in the area.
The River Aube surely is a key point in the location of the battle, I don't think it has moved much over the past 1500 years.
But to be honest, I think this is the first serious query into the battle location since the discovery at Pouan in 1870.
Has anyone bothered to use Google Earth rather than a survey map to try and locate the possible location of the battle site? Google Earth is a godsend when looking for such things, it gives much more detail than a map can ever give and gives a much better idea of elevations, locations of rivers, streams, hills, towns and villages etc.
Quote:Has anyone bothered to use Google Earth rather than a survey map to try and locate the possible location of the battle site? Google Earth is a godsend when looking for such things, it gives much more detail than a map can ever give and gives a much better idea of elevations, locations of rivers, streams, hills, towns and villages etc.
Quote:Actually Mr. Vermaat, If you've memorized all of 5th century history like I have, you'd know that the Goths never went further north of Aquitane except on 2 occasions; once is the Battle of Chalons, the second was an attempted invasion of the Domain of Soissons.
There were several attempts by the Goths to break free of Roman domination during Aetius' rule, and although we only hear of specific sieges in the south from the sources, it wouldn't be surprising to find that they also attempted to expand northwards.
As to them only being recorded going north twice, according to the Additamenta ad Chronicon Prosper Hauniensis, s.a. 453 after the death of Attila the Visigothic king Thorismund attacked and defeated the Alans north of the Loire. Whether this fragment is true or not is another matter.
Quote:How else would we get that concentration of Visigothic crossbow-brooches located in the area between Paris and the Channel, dating to 450-500, the same time when similar types are concentrated in Aquitaine. (Wieczorek, A. (1996): Identität und Integration. Zur Bevölkerungspolitik der Merowinger nach archäologischen Quellen, in: Die Franken, Wegbereiter Europas, p.353 fig. 290). By the looks of it, they belonged to Goths fighting in the Roman army of Syagrius. Like the Franks, the Goths were no monolithic ethnic block which remained concentrated in one place around one leader. Sub-groups could and did fight on opposite sides, as you could/should have known from your well-memorized 5th-c. history.
Come on Robert, all of the Visigoths were Visigoths and never even thought about the possibility of changing sides: haven't you read your nineteenth-century textbooks yet?? Tsk, Tsk! :wink:
Ian (Sonic) Hughes "I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides, Peloponnesian War "I have just jazzed mine up a little" - Spike Milligan, World War II
Quote:There were several attempts by the Goths to break free of Roman domination during Aetius' rule, and although we only hear of specific sieges in the south from the sources, it wouldn't be surprising to find that they also attempted to expand northwards.
As to them only being recorded going north twice, according to the Additamenta ad Chronicon Prosper Hauniensis, s.a. 453 after the death of Attila the Visigothic king Thorismund attacked and defeated the Alans north of the Loire. Whether this fragment is true or not is another matter.
Off the top of my head:
Arles or Narbo in 426, Narbonne in 430/431, Narbonne in 436, Narbonne in 438, then Aetius Crushed them at Mons Colubrarius, and then in 439 Litorious got maimed at Tolosa resulting in the loss of Aetius' hunnic mercenaries.
Also, I found a ridge neraby at Arcis-Sur Aube, it's not exactly the best view, but it appears to be although small pretty steep. It's 3 kilos from the river and 3 kilos long.
The first is perpendicualr to the ridge to sort of show it, the second runs along side it
Quote:Come on Robert, all of the Visigoths were Visigoths and never even thought about the possibility of changing sides: haven't you read your nineteenth-century textbooks yet?? Tsk, Tsk! :wink:
:lol:
Robert Vermaat MODERATOR FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Quote: Mr. Vermaat, you are right, we don't know everything.
If you are calling me mr Vermaat once more I’ll… The name’s Robert. Mr Vermaat makes me sound ancient. :wink:
Quote:Those brooches could have been anything from visigothic, to Equipment scavenged by the forces of Syagrius because he could not equip his own men. Who knows.
That’s not what the experts say. In fact they are linked with danubian Gothic finds and some think they belong to a group of Goths which entered Gaul at a later stage, still wearing fibulae which had gone out of fashion with Goths who dwelled in Gaul for some time. Some claim that a name can be added to this group, that of a leader called Vidimer.
Anyway, the fibulae are from the same type as found in Aquitaine, which are quite securely linked to Goths that belong to the main group of Visigoths, no doubt representing one of the sub-groups of later 5th century Visigoths in Gaul.
Quote: But you are right, I have done much research into Migration studies, and (as shown in Peter Heather's Empires and Barbarians) it's not solid Blocks of people its multiple subgroups and tribes slowly shifting as they change alliances and grow as a population group. Aetius and Attila show that perfectly, as although the Huns were not friendly, aetius did recruit Hunnic Foederati to fight for him until 439 when they were destroyed at Toulose.
Indeed. And one solitary funeral can belong to either a main group on the move, or anyone of a smaller group being attached to other Goths, Romans, Huns or Franks.
Quote:About your Plumbata, can I see an image of the Plumbata itself? Because it could also possibly be from an earlier timeframe (Both 270s and 350s are likely times considering the Battle of CHalons in 274 and the Roman-Alamannic Wars in the 350s)
You can if you PM me your email address. But I’m not sure why you think you can attach a period dating to it by simply looking at the image. Plumbatae (and I have the most complete database) are not datable by typology. So yes, it could be from any war, either against Germanic incursions or civil wars between Roman armies.
Quote:But there's always the possibility the Plumbata floated downstream, (I'm pretty sure the river Aube runs west) because the Treasure of Pouan was found on the south bank of the Aube River.
Hardly. Plumbatae are called so because of their lead weight. They don’t float. :mrgreen:
Quote: The River Aube surely is a key point in the location of the battle, I don't think it has moved much over the past 1500 years.
Me neither. I’m no geologist, but this valley does not look anything like a floodplain where a river could meander about at will over time.
Robert Vermaat MODERATOR FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
