RomanArmyTalk
Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand. - Printable Version

+- 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)



Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Theoderic - 12-02-2012

Hi All

Renatus makes a good point.


I have found a site that ticks all the boxes and fits the scenarios, just outside Tring next to Akeman Street where the Icknield Way crosses it at Coombe Hill......

What do you think?

Kind Regards - Deryk


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Theoderic - 12-02-2012

Hi All

Renatus makes a good point.


I have found a site that ticks all the boxes and fits the scenarios, just outside Tring next to Akeman Street where the Icknield Way crosses it at Coombe Hill......

What do you think?





Kind Regards - Deryk


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Theoderic - 12-02-2012

Hi Renatus

You have a good point.....

I have found a place along Akeman Street where the Icknield Way crosses it at Coombe....

It seems to tick all the boxes and the scenarios.....

What do you think?

Kind Regards - Deryk

[attachment=5974]RAT011212a.pdf[/attachment]


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Theoderic - 12-02-2012

Hi All

Here are another couple of images...

The site is only about 9 miles from Dunstable.....

Kind Regards - Deryk


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Theoderic - 12-02-2012

Hi All

Here are another couple of images of Tring....

The site is only nine miles from Dunstable



[attachment=5975]RAT011212b.pdf[/attachment]

[attachment=5976]RAT011212c.pdf[/attachment]


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Renatus - 12-02-2012

That looks a really interesting site. It also provides an answer to my question as to why the Britons would go that way. I still think that an attack on Cogidubnus and his territories would have been an attractive proposition for them. The most direct route from London would be along the Portway through Staines. However, if their priority was to eliminate centres of Roman influence first, geographically the next target after London would be Verulamium. After that, the most direct route would seem to be along Akeman Street to Tring and then down the Icknield Way.


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Nathan Ross - 12-03-2012

It is a good site. I'd been looking at maps of the Tring area before, but only to the north and not to the south. But the topography seems viable, there are no intervening rivers and the distance from both London and St Albans is very reasonable. Having said that, I'd still prefer Dunstable (of course!) as a strategic site. But as we don't know quite where the Roman garrisons and forts were at this point it's impossible to be more exact in our small-scale strategic calculations!



Quote:an attack on Cogidubnus and his territories would have been an attractive proposition for them.

Not sure about that. A direct invasion of Cogidubnus's territory would risk turning a uprising for a very obvious cause (revenge on the Romans) into an inter-tribal British conflict, with corresponding dangers of political disunity in Boudica's force. Even if Cogidubnus was a collaborator, he was still a British king, and would surely have had his own networks of alliance and influence that might have stretched throughout the rebel tribes and their ruling aristocracies.

Cogidubnus was apparently honoured for his role in the war, but this could just as well have been for keeping his own people under control and refusing to aid the rebels, thus securing Paulinus's western flank and preventing the rebellion spreading, than any active measure. He could also have supplied and sheltered Paulinus, of course, but I don't think we need to rely on this interpretation.


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Renatus - 12-04-2012

Quote:Not sure about that. A direct invasion of Cogidubnus's territory would risk turning a uprising for a very obvious cause (revenge on the Romans) into an inter-tribal British conflict, with corresponding dangers of political disunity in Boudica's force. Even if Cogidubnus was a collaborator, he was still a British king, and would surely have had his own networks of alliance and influence that might have stretched throughout the rebel tribes and their ruling aristocracies.
I suspect that, once the rebellion started, everything changed. It was an all-or-nothing situation and anyone who was perceived to be pro-Roman is likely to have been treated as anti-rebellion and ripe for attack. There is another possibility, however. The rebels may have believed (perhaps with justification) that, if they were seen to be advancing on Cogidubnus' territory, this would encourage an anti-Roman faction amongst the Atrebates to rise, overthrow the king and bring the tribe into the revolt. If that had happened, Paulinus would have lost probably his main ally amongst the British nobility, the smaller tribes would have seen where their interests lay and joined the revolt, and the province would then truly have been lost. Perhaps it was this possibility, amongst other considerations, that persuaded Paulinus to give battle when he would really rather not have done so.


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - mcbishop - 12-04-2012

Quote:I still think that an attack on Cogidubnus and his territories would have been an attractive proposition for them.
I thought we weren't allowed to all him that any more? Or has everything moved full circle once more and I missed it? Never sure these days...

Mike Bishop


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Robert Vermaat - 12-04-2012

Quote:
Renatus post=325732 Wrote:I still think that an attack on Cogidubnus and his territories would have been an attractive proposition for them.
I thought we weren't allowed to all him that any more? Or has everything moved full circle once more and I missed it? Never sure these days...
What's the (correct?) aternative - Togodumnus?


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Renatus - 12-04-2012

Quote:I thought we weren't allowed to all him that any more? Or has everything moved full circle once more and I missed it? Never sure these days...
No, I'm almost certainly behind the times. Still, like Robert, I would like to know what I should call him.


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - John1 - 12-11-2012

The popular interest the story continues with last nights "Instruments of Death";

http://uktv.co.uk/yesterday/homepage/sid/9353

This one plumps for a VERY certain and passionate Martin Marix Evans in Paulerpury (maybe a two for the price of one one deal as he did the Naseby episode too). Interestingly the "Mincing Machine" of Punt PI makes a re-appearance, must get rid of the images of effeminate Legions in my head... :oops: Otherwise nothing new.


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - Gatorsailor - 12-18-2012

Being new to this forum, I've been reading through this string with interest. Each of the sites discussed do have merit, and match the criteria given. However, I do have just one question, for the largest battle fought on British soil, where some 80,000 died and who knows how many wagons burned and equipment destroyed, why is there not more archaeological evidence to hint to where this fight took place?


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - John1 - 12-18-2012

Hi Ralph welcome to the thread that just won't die..... what you are seeing on this thread is really just a scoping exercise, an attempt to find targets for archaeology.With limited time and resources we've put several new candidates for this on the table. In terms of the physical archaeology we're limited to what we can see on the surface and what has been reported in the past, i.e. with Church Stowe we have a number of Ancient monuments and a tiny archaeological report from a dig in the 50's which I have tried to draw into the narrative, but Nathan does it better. Both Paulerspury and Mancetter were subject to some archaeo investigation, metal detecting and C14 on human remains at Paulerspury, and a full on dig at Mancetter but to date no conclusive evidence. This had led to the theory that the battle site was "picked clean" being established as a dangerous principal.

Over here we are massively oversupplied with potential archaeological sites of all types and ages and over recent decades the archaeological profession has been in "rescue" mode, ie trying to save material that would otherwise be lost to development. I hope this explains the lack of engagement in this topic by real archaeologists. There seems no end to the number of historians and pundits who are prepared to publish or make tv shows on the subject but the only living archaeologist who has had the nerve to have a punt at identifying the site, as far as I know, is Grahame Appleby.

Gut feeling is that we'll get to the archaeology in the end, but a which site is anyone guess, it'll probably be one not mentioned on this thread and be stumbled across by some bloke with a metal detector. Kalkreise was completely unknown until an off duty RAMC chap found some Roman coins in an odd context. In the case of Church Stowe I suspect the ground level for the battlefield contact point is at least a metre below the current field surface so even if it hasn't been "picked clean" it will be deep and surface finds will be hard to locate.

The real mystery of the project is why are the archaeologists not apparently looking for the site, surely it would make their careers if they scored a hit.

Until then it's just down to RATS with maps :whistle:


Calling all armchair generals! Boudica\'s Last Stand. - mcbishop - 12-18-2012

Quote:The real mystery of the project is why are the archaeologists not apparently looking for the site, surely it would make their careers if they scored a hit.
Simply answered: funding. On a day when TAG is discussing the current assault on archaeology (in universities and at county level, with HERs and curators being chucked out, museums shut down) the research side of archaeology is in no position to pursue a chimaera as rare and elusive as this one (there's no research archaeology on Hadrian's Wall at the moment – Vindolanda is on the Stanegate, before anybody objects – so a stray battlefield stands little chance). Developer-funded archaeology has to look where the development is (otherwise developers won't fund it!), in which case finding the battlefield would be serendipity, which just leaves specialised community archaeology projects funded by the HLF or similar and I can just see the proposal for that particular tranche of funding:

'We're looking for a battlefield'
'Where?'
'Well, we have a few candidates...'
'Any hard evidence?'
'Umm, Tacitus... ish...'
'Thank you, good bye'

Archaeology is labour-intensive and expensive even if everybody on the ground volunteers (specialist services such as geophysics, conservators, environmental analysis, pottery and small find reports, cost serious money) and it is simply impossible to go hunting for one specific 'event' (which may or may not have left a substantive trace in the ground) without a major clue to its presence (the identification of the actual battlefield at Bosworth is one example where this did work, but they had more than the mangled text of Tacitus to go on).

For all the debate over likely candidates, the best chance still remains a lucky find. Digging up a scythed chariot would be bound to get somebody's attention ;-)

[Image: Boudiccastatue.jpg]

Mike Bishop