+- 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. - Renatus - 10-19-2022
(10-19-2022, 10:19 AM)Nathan Ross Wrote:(10-18-2022, 07:47 PM)Renatus Wrote: In that case, where are the Romans?
I would suggest either of these positions (more or less as I did back here):
I see. I was misreading your earlier post. When you said that the plain extended NNW towards the line of Newground Road, I saw that as being away from the Roman position, not towards it.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - dadlamassu - 12-13-2022
Some time ago I "volunteered" to try my hand at a military appreciation of this campaign. I have, so far, added a few volumes to my library as pre-Christmas presents to myself and looked at the British and Roman ways of fighting, their logistics and rates of maneouvre. So I have been doing quite a lot of reading, internet searches and watched a TV documentary ("Britain's Lost Battles - the Battle of Watling Street"). I am still researching and will be going in to the National Library of Scotland (NLS) after Christmas and Hogmanay. To speed me along the way I have a few questions/observations that need evidence and so any help on direction and sources is appreciated (lead me to the sources of evidence and I will try to draw military conclusions):
1. I am having a bit of difficulty creating a time line for Suetonius Paulinus (SP) in Britain. Am I correct in saying that Tacitus (Annals) has his appointment after the untimely death of his predecessor and on arrival spends 2 Campaign Seasons fighting in Britannia. On the Third season (year) he attacks Mona?
2. I have read three different translations of Tacitus (my Latin is not good enough) - all say that for the final battle SP had XIV Legion and some of XX and gathered in nearby Auxiliaries. One implies that "gathered in" troops might number 10,000 and brought no Auxiliaries with him. One that he gathered in veterans of the XX as well and may have auxiliaries from the Mona task force as well as local troops and one that his entire force was 10,000. So from these I think I have his force being between 10,000 and 20,000.
3. In the TV documentary one historian (cannot remember her name) said that in describing the battlefield the word Tacitus uses for "defile(s)" is plural. Can anyone say if this is correct? If it is then it will affect my interpretation of how SP managed his battle space.
4. Timeline issue: Boudicca attacks Camulodunum and courier sent to SP who is some 250 miles away. Message probably gets to him about the time the Temple of Claudius falls. At best marching speed I would estimate that SP's column would take 10-12 days to reach Londinium so probably about 13 days at best to muster then march and arrive. Boudicca's host seems to take longer than that to march 60 miles to get there as Tacitus says that SP gets there first. (Unless he did do a cavalry dash - oh no not that again! or sent a recce party and Tacitus gave him credit for getting his army there.) So the Roman average rate of forced march over hostile ground was about 25-30 miles a day and Boudicca's host appears to be about 4 miles a day.
5. It may be that looting Camulodunum and maybe destroying villas and settlements along the way (was there anything at Caesaromagus?) Archaeology seems to provide that tribal settlement(s) were burnt around this time but whether by Boudicca's host or by Roman reprisals is not clear.
No great rush for information as we are off to Londinium overnight tonight on the Megabus from Edinburgh (11 hours) for the Prince and Princess of Wales Trust Carol Service at Westminster Abbey on Thursday. Then Megabus back on Friday (9 hours). We had trains booked but had to change to the bus.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 12-13-2022
(12-13-2022, 02:10 PM)dadlamassu Wrote: 3. In the TV documentary one historian (cannot remember her name) said that in describing the battlefield the word Tacitus uses for "defile(s)" is plural. Can anyone say if this is correct? If it is then it will affect my interpretation of how SP managed his battle space.
that would be Margaret Hughes, detailed in her book:
https://www.history.org.uk/historian/resource/10000/boudica-at-mancetter-the-latin-the-land-the-log
I have no view on the plural, either through text nor strategy. The multiple was used by Rob Bell in a segue to Church Stowe and is errrmmm... something of an edit from any exchange I recall on the day.... I don't see the plural or that really matters in the way Mancetter are trying to use it. The ravines there (IMHO) are not of a consequential scale and do little for communications in order to synchronise an eruption....
Renatus had a view on the Latin I think...
PS for whom are you volunteering?
653,440
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Renatus - 12-13-2022
(12-13-2022, 02:10 PM)dadlamassu Wrote: To speed me along the way I have a few questions/observations that need evidence and so any help on direction and sources is appreciated
I'll give what help I can.
1. As I read it, Suetonius had two successful years and, building upon that, decided to attack Mona, so my interpretation coincides with yours.
2. As I interpret Tacitus, Suetonius' force comprised three elements: the 14th Legion, the veterans (i.e., those of more than 16 years' service) of the 20th, and the nearest available auxiliaries. The total force numbered 'ferme' 10,000 men. Ferme means 'nearly, almost, about', so I read his total force as being just under 10,000.
3. As John says, this would be Margaret Hughes. The word used by Tacitus is 'faucibus', which is the ablative of fauces. Fauces (like castra when referring to a camp) is plural in form but singular in meaning, so there was only one defile.
4. The problem here is that we do not know how much notice the colonists had of the impending attack. However, it seems evident that they had some warning, so I do not think that the sending of a courier to Suetonius coincided with the attack on the colony. The colonists had time to send a plea for help to Catus Decianus, he had time to cobble together his scratch force, and it seems that that force had time to get to the colony. Tacitus seems to imply that, had they not been misled by those sympathetic to the rebellion, the colonists would have had time to evacuate the women and old men and even to throw up some form of defences. I calculate that, if a message had been sent directly to Suetonius as soon as the danger became apparent, with sufficient remounts and relief riders, it could have reached him within 24 hours. However, it is possibly more likely that Decianus sent messengers to Suetonius and Cerialis as soon as he received the plea from the colonists. Nevertheless, they would both have received his messages quite quickly. This raises the question as to why Cerialis did not get to the colony in time to help. Given his character, his natural instinct would be to follow what seems to have been normal Roman practice and try to nip the rebellion in the bud with whatever force he could muster at short notice, however scanty and ill-equipped it might be (exactly what Decianus did, as it happens). I think the answer to this lies in the character of Suetonius who, Tacitus says, was naturally cautious and given to delay. During the civil war in AD69, he allowed a Vitellian force to escape because he took the view that there was time enough for victory when steps had been taken to avoid defeat. In the context of the Boudican revolt, I think that his intention was to take the 14th Legion, rendezvous with Cerialis and the 9th, and together go to the relief of the colony. He therefore ordered Cerialis to wait for him. It was only when Cerialis realised that Suetonius could not get to him in time that he set off himself but by then it was too late.
5. There may well have been some time spent by the rebels in looting Camulodunum and raiding Roman settlements but I think that generally the rebels moved much more slowly than the Romans. Accompanied by ox-drawn wagons, they could only cover 5-10 miles a day, whereas Suetonius with mules could cover some 20 miles a day, so at least twice as fast as the rebels. Incidentally, I do not think that Suetonius went to London down Watling Street but that he took the Via Devana to link up with Cerialis and, when informed of Cerialis' defeat and the fall of the colony, marched down Ermine Street and reached London that way. That would take him through hostile territory, as Tacitus tells us.
I hope that this helps and does not encroach too much upon your appreciation of the situation.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Nathan Ross - 12-14-2022
Here are some thoughts, building on what John and Michael have already said:
(12-13-2022, 02:10 PM)dadlamassu Wrote: 1. Suetonius Paulinus... spends 2 Campaign Seasons fighting in Britannia. On the Third season (year) he attacks Mona?
Tacitus isn't clear enough about his chronology to be sure which years he means, but the Mona operation and the revolt were either during Paulinus's third year or at the end of his successful second campaign - either AD60 or 61 is possible. The Roman campaign season in Britain began in the summer, and Mona would have been a lengthy operation involving building boats and provisioning forts, so we are probably looking at late summer or early autumn by the time it is completed.
(12-13-2022, 02:10 PM)dadlamassu Wrote: 2. ... I think I have his force being between 10,000 and 20,000.
As Michael says, the text claims that he had 'close to' to 'nearly' 10,000 men by the time of the battle, legionaries and auxiliaries 'from the nearest forts' combined.
(12-13-2022, 02:10 PM)dadlamassu Wrote: 3. ...the word Tacitus uses for "defile(s)" is plural.
Again following Michael - the word is plural but describes a singular feature. In terrain terms we could think of it like 'narrows', 'straits' or jaws', which have a similar plural/singular structure in English.
(12-13-2022, 02:10 PM)dadlamassu Wrote: 4. Timeline issue... Message probably gets to him about the time the Temple of Claudius falls...
This one issue has caused unlimited confusion over the years! Tacitus says that as Paulinus was completing his operations on Anglesey, he heard of 'the revolt of the province'. He then skips back in time to describe the Iceni uprising and everything up to the fall of Colchester. He then picks up the story again with Paulinus arriving at London.
Many people have assumed from this that the news Paulinus received must have been the fall of Colchester. But this is very unlikely, I think - the Romans in Colchester knew of the Iceni threat before the attack happened, possibly some before, and it would have taken the Iceni and their allies time to mobilise, arm themselves and march on the colony. Decianus Catus also knew of the threat, and sent men to reinforce the colonists. He would surely have warned Paulinus as well at this point - and it was this news, I believe, and not word of the fall of Colchester, that Paulinus received at Anglesey and which spurred him to an immediate response.
I've described march timelines etc in detail a few times on this thread - essentially, Paulinus needs c.13-17 days to get to London using normal Roman marching routine, depending on the route. We don't know how fast the Britons were moving, or whether they moved straight towards London after Colchester. But there would most probably have been sufficient time for Paulinus to get to London ahead of them - which is what Tacitus tells us he did!
(12-13-2022, 02:10 PM)dadlamassu Wrote: 5. Archaeology seems to provide that tribal settlement(s) were burnt around this time but whether by Boudicca's host or by Roman reprisals is not clear.
As we've discussed a few times, it's very difficult to assign areas of destruction to particular dates without additional evidence. The evidence of burning at St Albans, for example, is fairly limited compared to London and Colchester, and it's just an assumption that they all date from the same episode. Adding similar evidence from places like Staines and Silchester, Godmanchester and elsewhere may or may not provide an accurate picture - we just don't know.
Hope that helps a little. Meanwhile, have a great time in London and we will all look forward to your thoughts in the new year!
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Steve Kaye - 12-14-2022
Hello Alan (dadlamassu),
To answer John's question, I invited you to 'volunteer' your military perspective (well, I wrote what others were probably thinking).
John, Nathan and Renatus have already answered your questions but I'll nibble at the margins.
1) The timeline issue, prior to Suetonius arriving/leaving London, is a rabbit hole best avoided. I think it better to consider Tacitus' text in terms of place and order, not that that removes ambiguity.
2) The crucial point to consider was when Suetonius left London with his army of < 10k men. What were his motives, what did he assume he knew, did he understand what Boudica's plan was or what her imperatives were, what was his plan A, did he have a plan B at that point and, given answers to the preceding, which direction from London did he march? It's Suetonius' decisions that govern the outcome of the rebellion; if we could get a clearer understanding of his military mind ...
3) Assuming that he knew the 2nd was not marching when he was in London how might this affect his plan(s). Would a military commander try to gain control of the 2nd? How might this factor influence his direction of march from London?
4) Scale: southern England is a small place. How would a military commander think of this area of operation, where are the borders, where are the havens (forts). Would he plan a movement from London within this small area that best utilised the differences between his forces (those with him, those to be approached, those to be commanded to rendezvous). Terrain type, distances, supplies, reinforcements, friendly/hostile territory, politics, the season - so many factors.
5) Force numbers at the battle: I'm interested to hear what your military mind says the minimum size of a force of tribesmen would have to be to cause them to think they could attack and defeat a c.1km wide, Roman frontline sited in a topographic depression. A ratio of 2:1 (tribesmen:Romans), 3:1, 4:1? What factors influence the decision making, both for the individual tribesmen and Boudica and her advisors?
I'll stop nibbling.
Thanks for this examination - hope you enjoy it.
Regards, Steve Kaye
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - dadlamassu - 12-17-2022
I am enjoying this. All the different opinions of what happened, at what time and in what order I find fascinating. Looking at how the terrain of area of operations has changed since 60/61AD is interesting.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 12-20-2022
If you are interested in the lead shot and fort theory near St Albans I raised earlier in the thread this free online event might be of interest;
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/the-windridge-farm-roman-sling-bullets-a-talk-by-john-reid-tickets-452416027517
I'm sure it will be based on Dr Reids paper published in Britannia in August 22, good for any sling junkies out there:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/britannia/article/windridge-farm-glandes-revisited-clues-to-conquest/768DDFB96B6CD8F276DF42CA99BA0046
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - dadlamassu - 12-20-2022
(12-20-2022, 10:33 AM)John1 Wrote: If you are interested in the lead shot and fort theory near St Albans I raised earlier in the thread this free online event might be of interest;
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/the-windridge-farm-roman-sling-bullets-a-talk-by-john-reid-tickets-452416027517
I'm sure it will be based on Dr Reids paper published in Britannia in August 22, good for any sling junkies out there:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/britannia/article/windridge-farm-glandes-revisited-clues-to-conquest/768DDFB96B6CD8F276DF42CA99BA0046
Thanks, I will add the article to the list for my visits to NLS and will join the online event.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 12-28-2022
New Book Alert for Spring 2023 by Hodder and Stoughton:
Echolands: A Journey in Search of Boudica - Duncan Mackay
Anyone seen it yet?
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Renatus - 12-28-2022
(12-28-2022, 04:43 PM)John1 Wrote: New Book Alert for Spring 2023 by Hodder and Stoughton:
Echolands: A Journey in Search of Boudica - Duncan Mackay
Anyone seen it yet?
No - and according to their website, Hodder & Stoughton have not heard of it either.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - John1 - 12-28-2022
it's listed under them here:
http://halfmanhalfbook.co.uk/book-musings/anticipated-books-for-spring-2023/
story goes Mackay is a reputable archaeologist with a collection of Boudicca beer mats.... so I'll have it on advanced order.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Renatus - 12-28-2022
Found it. Apparently, it's due out in April. The secret is not to look for it on the website (Silly me! Fancy thinking I'd find it there!) but to search 'Hodder and Stoughton catalogue' on Google and then scroll through the non-fiction section of the 2023 Spring Catalogue.
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Steve Kaye - 12-29-2022
(12-20-2022, 10:33 AM)John1 Wrote: I'm sure it will be based on Dr Reids paper published in Britannia in August 22, good for any sling junkies out there:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/britannia/article/windridge-farm-glandes-revisited-clues-to-conquest/768DDFB96B6CD8F276DF42CA99BA0046
The Windridge Farm Glandes Revisited: Clues to Conquest?
Pre-print at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362779931_The_Windridge_Farm_Glandes_Revisited_Clues_to_Conquest
RE: Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Renatus - 12-30-2022
The authors briefly consider whether these items might be connected with the Boudican revolt but reject the idea.