+- 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: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing (/showthread.php?tid=18106)
The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - LvpvsRomanvs - 01-04-2011
Salvete Omnes
I've been looking into theories concerning the site of Rutupiae, and how it could be the landing site of Plautius' main division. Either way, there are some convincing arguments: archaeological evidence suggests military activity within the area from the mid 1st century CE, the time of the initial invasion, and also the presense of a large natural harbour that could potentially have contained the invasion fleet. However, Bushe Fox says that the ditches dating to the mid 1st century are too shallow for the site to have been the main landing site.
What are your thoughts on this?
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - D B Campbell - 01-05-2011
Quote:Bushe Fox says that the ditches dating to the mid 1st century are too shallow for the site to have been the main landing site.Too shallow? :? Are you sure?
I expect you've seen E. Sauer, "The Roman Invasion of Britain (AD 43) in imperial perspective", Oxford Journal of Archaeology 21.4 (2002), pp. 333-363.
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - Dominicus - 01-05-2011
Well would they possibly have been deeper back during the 1st century? Just throwing that one out there. Btw,about how close did the Roman ships have to get to shore to properly comense amphibious landings? How deep would the water need to be?
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - Maximus Decimus - 01-05-2011
Roman ships could come in quite close?
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - Astiryu1 - 01-06-2011
Couldn't they beach the ships? The Greek ones were capable of it and the Vikings did it later; or I am mislead.
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - jvrjenivs - 01-06-2011
Quote:Couldn't they beach the ships? The Greek ones were capable of it and the Vikings did it later; or I am mislead.
Actually they had to beach the ships to get them in shape.
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - Astiryu1 - 01-06-2011
You mean for hull maintenance and all that? I read somewhere that dry docks are a possibility but I have never seen any proof. I haven't looked very hard either.
Of Course they had to pick a good beach! Rocks putting a gash in your hull isn't very good for business. What is Rutupiae's shore like now and what would it have been like (roughly) then according to sea levels and such? Are there any good photos of the shoreline and these "ditches"?
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - jvrjenivs - 01-06-2011
you have to go on land everyday for sure. These vessels were not big enough to house sleeping place and foot (and drinking water) for the whole crew for a long time, so they at least needed to beach regularly to get re-equiped. Also, to maintain a ship without modern stuff to protect the wood, it can't be left in the water all the time. It will absorb to much water, become rather heavy and sunk, also.
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - Gaius Julius Caesar - 01-06-2011
During Caesars expeditions, a storm partially wrecked one of his fleets, I think they hauled them onto the beach after that to protect them from further destruction, I would need to re-read his writings though to be sure about that point.
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - Gaius Julius Caesar - 01-06-2011
During Caesars expeditions, a storm partially wrecked one of his fleets, I think they hauled them onto the beach after that to protect them from further destruction, I would need to re-read his writings though to be sure about that point.
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - LvpvsRomanvs - 01-06-2011
Sorry guys, I must have misread that they apparently too shallow :S apologies. I've found a quote of his theory in G.Webster's "The Roman Conquest of Britain" (1965):
"The earthwork was without doubt formed as a temporary defense to cover the disembarkation of the troops at the time of the invasion and to serve as a protection for the ships drawn up on to the shore during the initial stages of the campaign in AD 43. There is no evidence of a heavy occupation at this period, and only a small detachment may have been in garrison there: it may have been left derelict for several years."
Re: The Roman Invasion of Britain: Landing - D B Campbell - 01-06-2011
Quote:I've found a quote of his theory in G.Webster's "The Roman Conquest of Britain" (1965)Ah, Dudley & Webster, The Roman Conquest of Britain, a splendid book. (Repackaged, after Dudley's death, as Webster & Dudley, The Roman Conquest of Britain, it resurfaced in 1980, a mere shadow of its former glory (imho), as Webster, The Roman Invasion of Britain.) Definitely go for the 1965 classic.