+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. (/showthread.php?tid=16575)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Owein Walker - 09-30-2022
(09-30-2022, 07:19 AM)Renatus Wrote:Evidence,hmm,if you mean only using the written accounts then that's a restriction I can't apply, and yes, John is right, it is the topography that counts.(09-29-2022, 11:42 PM)Owein Walker Wrote: I'm keeping defile, rampart and camp, because SP would want them, and I can't think of a better reason than that.
I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at. If you're saying that Suetonius built a camp, of course he did; that is what the Romans did. On the other hand, if you're saying that some translator's use of 'rampart' (which, as John says, is figurative) means that he constructed an artificial barrier on top of an existing feature, you are indulging in supposition that goes far beyond the evidence. Tacitus is clear; it is the narrowness of the place that provides the protection. It was narrow enough for Suetonius to be able to block it with his troops and thus leave no space for the enemy to outflank him. John is right; it is the topography that counts.
SP would choose a site where he could place his camp on higher ground, very close to the battlefield. It would not be a short march away from the battle for two reasons.
Number 1/ When moving his troops out of the camp to take up their positions, they would be vulnerable to attack.
Number 2/ His camp is not only a shelter for the civilians, but it is also a strong defensive position that he might need to fall back to.
I also suggest SP would need to leave some troops to defend the camp if it was some distance away, and he wouldn't want to do that.
Perhaps my choices are military decisions that are not covered by Tacitus or Dio, but their accounts are brief and omit details throughout.
Of course topography is everything, that's why I place the camp on higher ground with a slope leading to it, that forms a rampart. The whole slope, ditch, bank and camp are one thing, a bit like a Hillfort of the period . It's a simple defence with a rampart.
It is not something new, and that's why it's not mentioned in detail.
Am I indulging far beyond the evidence? I am sure I read about SP building camps and ditches, in the Atlas mountains, supplies being further defended with ditches and ramparts during the invasion of Britain against mass attacks, even a camp being attacked and both sides digging more trenches, Julius Caesar has even reverted to ditches when he was vastly outnumbered during a siege. I'm sorry if my memory lacks the details, but all that was years ago.
What I am saying is that these defences were part of the battlefields of the period, and for that reason I think SP would use them too.
He chose a position that was clearly defensive, so it makes sense that he would further strengthen his position.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Renatus - 09-30-2022
I don't think that we are in disagreement about much of this. My point is that the 'rampart' issue applies to his position in the defile and how the topography provided him with protection. It has nothing to do with how his camp may have been fortified. I am not suggesting for a minute that his camp was in the defile.
A side issue is whether he still had the civilians with him. We are told nothing about this. My guess is that he would have wished to leave them as soon as possible after he had got them away from the area of immediate danger. However, on this your guess is as good as mine. Alan may have some input on this.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - dadlamassu - 09-30-2022
(09-30-2022, 09:42 AM)Renatus Wrote: I don't think that we are in disagreement about much of this. My point is that the 'rampart' issue applies to his position in the defile and how the topography provided him with protection. It has nothing to do with how his camp may have been fortified. I am not suggesting for a minute that his camp was in the defile.
A side issue is whether he still had the civilians with him. We are told nothing about this. My guess is that he would have wished to leave them as soon as possible after he had got them away from the area of immediate danger. However, on this your guess is as good as mine. Alan may have some input on this.
Thanks, I see SP building a camp that is large enough for his 10,000 troops plus the usual supports. I do not see him keeping a swarm of civilians with him and would be rid of them at the first safe opportunity. That said if any were veterans amongst them then he may well have embodied them into ad hoc units and employed them to garrison the camp or another duty (see below).
Building a camp and leaving a defensive force there is what my reading says is a Roman Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that would be done in every day on campaign. But where would this camp be? From Tacitus there is a wood securing his rear. In normal circumstances it would be the camp that secures his rear - close enough to fall back on but here we are told of a wood. This, to me, implies that he camp is in a clearing in the wood or on the other side of it.
Digression to modern military experience ... for a wood to "secure" the rear it would need to be garrisoned with at least a blocking force to prevent an enemy force sneaking through. So did SP place a force there (veterans)? We will probably never know.
In a battle like this while terrain is important, so is weather and time of day. Even today the first two parts of a briefing are Ground and Meteorology summaries. Troops may be hungry/thirsty, sun in eyes, shadows hiding troops, time remaining for pursuit etc.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 10-01-2022
"I see SP building a camp that is large enough for his 10,000 troops plus the usual supports" dadla.
It's buried deep in the thread but you won't catch me agreeing with this, and I think it's core to the debate. A single camp for all SP's forces would be a huge marker for the battle site search and the key feature to search for, but a couple of issues make me assume this would not be the case and so is not a reliable indicator for the battlefield location.
1, If the topography was the, or one of the, most important aspect of the site then the top of slope would be the site for any camp and the scale of any camp/camps would be dictated by the ability of the terrain, possibly a ridge top, to accommodate this.
2, SP was not certain of the forces he might have to accommodate. He seems to have been expecting to accommodate a contingent of Legio II and may have got some of Cerealis' cavalry from the IX. Therefore he had no finite camp scale to work to. It seems possible that sub units would be responsible for more modest camps, maybe 5 camps of 2k each.
3, Pre-existing structures may have been utilised for some or all of SP's units. Certainly the Church Stowe (CS) theory is linked to a potential depot or jump off point for SP's forces before heading to Mona being based along the Nene line that Upex has suggested along the Nene. This raises the possibility of a pre-campaign logistic depot being a post Mona mustering point that may have both been known and supplied for SP's rallying point. The Weedon Bec depot is a Georgian corollary close to CS.
I'm of the view there may have been a single large camp but I am inclined to think the Roman force may have been accommodated in a number of more manageable scale camps on a ridge top, a ridge top that was already well know from earlier in the Mona campaign and with a longer post conquest history. A hill top camp or camp network is a challenge when Steve Kaye's water supply issues are factored in, however a perched water table would largely take care of that. So If there was a single large camp it rules out a lot of potential sites and makes demands of a large camp find that no site to date lays claim to other than a bit of a feeble "it might have been there but has subsequently been obliterated by development" (Tring or Dunstable I think) ....
Just a catch up on points previously made for the ease of new readers.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - dadlamassu - 10-02-2022
My input is applying a military perspective. SP as Governor and Army commander already knows that the enemy forces have overrun at least 3 towns, several estates and defeated at least one significant Roman force (Cerialis' infantry). He will also be aware that small dispersed camps of 2K troops would be vulnerable to annihilation in detail. While I am not saying that he may have done that due to circumstances I do not see dispersal in the face of a huge enemy force as being his preferred option. One of the Principles of War is concentration of effort. This may be achieved by having a main camp with a couple of satellite camps within a very short distance.
Looking at the archaeology of other camps (on the Rhine, for example) they were increased and decreased in size at intervals, presumably as the garrison increased or decreased. SP could have immediately made one camp for his troops under command as more arrive the camp can be extended. Maybe not ideal but certainly possible. His troop strength, logistics (inc water), terrain and weather would determine the eventual choice of camps.
However, if we downgrade the strength of Boudica's forces considerably from the accounts then dispersal is less risky.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 10-02-2022
"small dispersed camps of 2K troops would be vulnerable" - dadla
I'm not thinking dispersed, I am thinking thoroughly commanding a ridge top with interlocking fields of fire/observation. The scale dictated by terrain rather than standing orders.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Owein Walker - 10-02-2022
(09-30-2022, 04:13 PM)dadlamassu Wrote:(09-30-2022, 09:42 AM)Renatus Wrote: I don't think that we are in disagreement about much of this. My point is that the 'rampart' issue applies to his position in the defile and how the topography provided him with protection. It has nothing to do with how his camp may have been fortified. I am not suggesting for a minute that his camp was in the defile.
A side issue is whether he still had the civilians with him. We are told nothing about this. My guess is that he would have wished to leave them as soon as possible after he had got them away from the area of immediate danger. However, on this your guess is as good as mine. Alan may have some input on this.
Thanks, I see SP building a camp that is large enough for his 10,000 troops plus the usual supports. I do not see him keeping a swarm of civilians with him and would be rid of them at the first safe opportunity. That said if any were veterans amongst them then he may well have embodied them into ad hoc units and employed them to garrison the camp or another duty (see below).
Building a camp and leaving a defensive force there is what my reading says is a Roman Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that would be done in every day on campaign. But where would this camp be? From Tacitus there is a wood securing his rear. In normal circumstances it would be the camp that secures his rear - close enough to fall back on but here we are told of a wood. This, to me, implies that he camp is in a clearing in the wood or on the other side of it.
Digression to modern military experience ... for a wood to "secure" the rear it would need to be garrisoned with at least a blocking force to prevent an enemy force sneaking through. So did SP place a force there (veterans)? We will probably never know.
In a battle like this while terrain is important, so is weather and time of day. Even today the first two parts of a briefing are Ground and Meteorology summaries. Troops may be hungry/thirsty, sun in eyes, shadows hiding troops, time remaining for pursuit etc.
(10-02-2022, 09:59 AM)John1 Wrote: "small dispersed camps of 2K troops would be vulnerable" - dadla
I'm not thinking dispersed, I am thinking thoroughly commanding a ridge top with interlocking fields of fire/observation. The scale dictated by terrain rather than standing orders.
The problem with this defence of a ridge top, apart from it's supposed to be covered in trees, is it can be rolled over from one end to the other. Unless it is one or two, nearly continuous defences with nearby water supplies, then it only weakens SP's position.
It sounds a bit like the film version of Waterloo, unless I am mistaken.
The scale dictated by terrain, OK, but the terrain chosen by SP.
Ask yourself why he would choose a site where his best plan is to divide his troops into smaller, weaker groups that could be isolated, even attacked during the night and picked off one at a time ?
Sorry John. I don't think he would have got through the Atlas mountains fighting like this.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 10-02-2022
"it can be rolled over from one end to the other" Owain.
I'm not expecting them to be using the camps as strong points. At the time of contact I would expect the Romans to be deployed in the open field along a section of a the ridge top with well anchored flanks. Camps are camps and function as camps, camps for a field army that engages in the open ground assisted by terrain advantage selected by Paulinus .
Equally I don't think forested ridgetops are a meaningful defence. I think the only British woodland typology that provides a meaningful defence against light infantry is boggy valley bottoms choked with willow and alder scrub/carr, these are the "backed by woods" Tacitus refers to and they surround 3 sides of the CS site compelling a British approach from the East.Ask yourself why
"ask yourself why...." Owain.
I did out loud, twice, it sounded just as silly. They are camps not strongholds and they are within spitting distance of each other with sensibly scaled perimeters.....
"Sorry John. I don't think he would have got through the Atlas mountains fighting like this.... " Owain
condescending much? As your description is clearly a misinterpretation of my position it's a pointless apology but thank you anyway....(retires from the thread in despair again - bye)
651,273
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Renatus - 10-02-2022
(10-02-2022, 06:17 PM)John1 Wrote: At the time of contact I would expect the Romans to be deployed in the open field along a section of a the ridge top with well anchored flanks.
You'll have to help me here, John. I thought the Romans were supposed to be in a defile, not on a ridge top.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 10-02-2022
Just for you Ren, a very brief return.
The "defile" is a valley, in my world a valley closed at one end. The Romans do not occupy the valley floor, instead they occupy the valley side slopes and ridge top (still the defile) inviting the opponents to occupy the base of the valley/defile. Obliging the enemy to climb the valley towards them both along the valley axis and up the valley sides, placing the Romans on the high ground, in these terms the "ridge tops".
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Renatus - 10-02-2022
(10-02-2022, 09:24 PM)John1 Wrote: Just for you Ren, a very brief return.
That's kind of you. However, I now have to ask a supplementary. On your scenario, how does the narrowness of the place provide a protection?
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 10-02-2022
Simply a narrow front for the Romans to defend and rules out the Roman line being out flanked by a far larger force.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Renatus - 10-03-2022
(10-02-2022, 09:43 PM)John1 Wrote: Simply a narrow front for the Romans to defend and rules out the Roman line being out flanked by a far larger force.
I would agree with that but how does that work if the Romans are on top of the ridge and the enemy is advancing up the sides of the defile?
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 10-03-2022
This is getting very detailed. Can I suggest you pop along to the site and take a look, I think you are only about 25 miles or so away.
You will see very steep side slopes that would keep the mob tightly in the valley base within range of scorpio, archers and slings. The general move would be to final contact at the closed western end of the valley where the main butchery would have taken place.
You aren't helping my escape from the Thread of Doom loop ...... feel free to PM me for more detail.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - dadlamassu - 10-03-2022
Interesting. If I understand this correctly the battlefield is less a defile more of a valley. SP occupies the high ground perhaps with a horseshoe string of camps. (I present an alternative that also fits below.) In your diagram on the aerial photo there is no scale though from the field sizes I estimate the valley width, red line to red line, at about 800 metres or so and the Roman frontage shown in red is about 2,000 metres.
I asked myself - "convince me why Boudicca leads a "charge of the Light Brigade" up the valley?"
So Boudicca arrives at the end of the valley with her huge force. The valley (blue arrow) is about 1,500 metres (half a league?) long and at the valley end she sees the Legionaries (or their marching camp?). Just what she expects to see as her forces have already seen them. Maybe SPs scouts have feigned retreats to draw Boudicca on? The reserves brought up by SP, Auxiliaries and cavalry, are concealed in the woods or behind the ridge crest. Overnight Boudicca's massive force encamps, a conference of chiefs takes place, the wives and waggons form their camps and there is much confidence and beer, mead, wine. In the morning the tribes form up. Chiefs, warlords, Boudicca and others fire up the warriors' fervour. No doubt carnyx horns are blaring. Behind them the women, wives, camp followers move up behind and add their encouragement standing on their wagons to get a better view. All this takes time and the Romans infuriatingly stand silent. Whether by command or when the war blood was high the tribes charge.
So it is possible.
However, why did Boudicca's scouts miss the Roman camps on the high ground and not to explore the options of fighting on broken ground and woods at which her forces are better than the Romans? Had SP, perhaps taken a leaf out of Caesar's book and made his camp undersized deliberately to hide the number of troops that he had?
If this is the case then SP was clearly a brilliant commander, a risk taker as his flanks could be enveloped and was very lucky.