Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 4.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand.
(11-10-2015, 02:39 PM)Robert Vermaat Wrote: The Iceni, having been occupied quite some time, would not have seen any druidic influence for a long time.
   

There's also the problem that virtually all we know about druids comes from Caesar, who was writing a century earlier and seemingly at second hand (he never mentions meeting a druid, despite all the years he spent in Gaul!) His idea of a widespread druidic system of religion and law may have been anachronistic even then.

Roman writers certainly knew of druids. There's a least the possibility that Tacitus just used a familiar-sounding word to describe whatever sort of native British priests Paulinus's men encountered on Mona.

The rites performed by Boudica (at least in Dio's account) may indicate that Iceni royalty had a religious duty, which would suggest that a separate druidic priestly caste was not a feature of their society.
Nathan Ross
Reply
Robert Vermaat wrote:


I agree that the remaining druids were a valid target for the Romans to attack. However i do not see that as a reason for the Iceni to rise on revolt. The coincidence, if any, would rather be that most of the Roman troops would be tied in battle on the opposite side of the Island.

Sorry Robert you misunderstand me. The Iceni rose in revolt because they had just been taken over as a Roman Province rather than being a Client Kingdom and had all their land and possessions subsumed into the Roman Empire.

The timing of the uprising to match the Governor fighting 200 miles away was too much of a co-incidence not to have been planned.   

Robert Vermaat wrote:

Sorry but there is no evidence whatsoever. The Iceni, having been occupied quite some time, would not have seen any druidic influence for a long time. To address Boudicca as a 'druidic leader' is pure speculation without foundation. A speech dreamed up by Tacitus does not change that.

From the texts, until one year previously the Iceni were not occupied but were a Client Kingdom running their own affairs. The Romans had only been occupying Britannia for 18 years and had established two towns, Colchester and St Albans and London was a successful and growing trading centre for Rome.

If we are going to accept Tacitus as a valid source I think that you have to accept his references to Boudica as a Queen of the Iceni and as person who performed a divination ceremony prior to the battle and as such may have been a priestess of some religion. It is interpretation but that doesn't make it any less valid than your opinon.

Nathan Ross wrote:

There's also the problem that virtually all we know about druids comes from Caesar, who was writing a century earlier and seemingly at second hand (he never mentions meeting a druid, despite all the years he spent in Gaul!) His idea of a widespread druidic system of religion and law may have been anachronistic even then.

Roman writers certainly knew of druids. There's a least the possibility that Tacitus just used a familiar-sounding word to describe whatever sort of native British priests Paulinus's men encountered on Mona. 

The rites performed by Boudica (at least in Dio's account) may indicate that Iceni royalty had a duty, which would suggest that a separate druidic priestly caste was not a feature of their society.

I cannot disprove your argument but Caesar's in depth description of the Druids and their influence and that their knowledge was taught in Britannia does seem to indicate that he did have an understanding of his enemy and their laws and religion. He certainly is of the impression that the Brythons were guided by the same hands.

Of course you don't have to have met someone of a different religion or who lives by a different set of laws to understand their way of living.  

The Romans themselves would also look for sacrificial augeries before battle so perhaps Tacitus was taking that as his example but I am not convinced.
   
Robert Vermaat wrote in reply to Theoderic's statement: "Communication between tribes was effective and also co-operation as well, against an external force, where mutually beneficial for the impacted tribes." 

Based on? And why did none of the other British tribes join the rebellion? If, as you claim, druidism was still influential and all the tribes would have been impacted?

You need to go back to the earlier invasions of the Brythons by Juliius Caesar to see the co-operation of the tribes against Caesar and also their change of heart once it looked like Cassivellaunus was about to be beaten. 

Also of the alliance between the Kings of Kent and Cassivellaunus against Caesar,where Cassivellaunus came to the aid of the Cantiaci which was reciprocated by the Cantiaci later in the campagn. This was in 54 BC a century before the uprising of the Iceni.

Also Tacitus writes "they (the Iceni) flew to arms and incited the Trinovantes and others who not yet broken by servitude had entered into a secret and treasonable compact to resume their independance".

My guess (as it is an interpretation) is that by AD55 the Cantiaci had been subjugated as had the Regnenses and were part of the Province, the Trinovantes were part of the Province, having been a previous Cliient Kingdom, the Catuvellauni were part of the Province,  the Belgae, the Durotriges and the Dobunni were part of the Province, as were Cornovii and the Coritani. (as per your interpretation), the Atrebates were a Client Kingdom, the Brigantes were a Client Kingdom and the Iceni were a Client Kiingdom.   

The Western tribes were still unconquered although contained.

By early / mid AD61 the above still held but the Dumnonii, the Silures, the Demetae, the Ordovices and the inhabitants of Mona had been conquered and were heavily garrisoned.

Probably the original rebellion was by the Iceni and the Trinovantes (Client Kingdoms absorbed into the Empire) but after the sacking of Colchester the Catuvellauni (also possible Client Kingdom absorbed into the Empire) the conquered Dobunni, and perhaps the Cornovii also seized their chance to take back their lands but there could have been uprisings elsewhere in the south west and north. The Atrebates and the Brigantes remained true to Rome.

One thing is for sure the two pieces of documented evidence we have indicates a huge force of people (much bigger than one or two tribes) fighting a much smaller Roman force and being beaten by superior generalship but surviving as a body to continue the war for a few more months until a "cease fire" was put in place.  
  




 
Deryk
Reply
Although an interesting diversion, this is not the topic of this thread.

Perhaps Druidism should have its own dedicated thread and we can stop adding to the huge number of posts on this one?
Moi Watson

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!
Reply
(11-11-2015, 07:56 PM)Vindex Wrote: Perhaps Druidism should have its own dedicated thread

I'm not sure there's much else that can be said about druids actually! They're only interesting here in relation to the Mona invasion, I think.


(11-10-2015, 07:55 PM)Theoderic Wrote: The timing of the uprising to match the Governor fighting 200 miles away was too much of a co-incidence not to have been planned.  

The Romans had been fighting almost continuously on the western (Wales) frontier since AD47 - coincidentally the same year that the Iceni last rebelled, and (probably) when Prasutagus was installed as puppet king. It was the death of Prasutagus, and the real possibility of a full Roman takeover, that prompted the rebellion. Paulinus being far away at the time was just par for the Roman course.
Nathan Ross
Reply
Nathan Ross wrote:

It was the death of Prasutagus, and the real possibility of a full Roman takeover, that prompted the rebellion. Paulinus being far away at the time was just par for the Roman course.

I agree.... but the Iceni etc. didn't attack until Paulinus was fully engaged at Mona and not earlier in the year when the "Battle Group" was fresh and closer to the east of the country.   


  
Deryk
Reply
But this thread is not about Mona, is it? It is about the last battle so just carrying on is not the point.
Moi Watson

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!
Reply
(11-12-2015, 08:26 AM)Vindex Wrote: But this thread is not about Mona, is it? It is about the last battle so just carrying on is not the point.

can you deal with the last battle without the wider context of the last campaign? I think the broader campaign discussions have been some of the highlights of the thread.... but then again you are the boss Moi.
Reply
I'm not the Boss at all (not sure why you've said that as I'm no longer a Moderator either).

The OP (wind back 71 pages if you need to) was about the site of the final battle. Any detail about why Paulinus was "late" is necessarily speculation as only he could tell us : )

The Second Legion were in the West to secure the gold mine IMHO but that's just speculation too.
Moi Watson

Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!
Reply
Theodoric, mind the real name issue please!

(11-10-2015, 07:55 PM)Theoderic Wrote: Sorry Robert you misunderstand me. The Iceni rose in revolt because they had just been taken over as a Roman Province rather than being a Client Kingdom and had all their land and possessions subsumed into the Roman Empire.

The timing of the uprising to match the Governor fighting 200 miles away was too much of a co-incidence not to have been planned.   
yes it seems we are in more agreement over this than I thought.
As for the uprising itself, I agree that the campaign of Paulinus was very much of influence on the uprising. But was it planned that way? I mean, all that agonizing stuff about Boudicca being flogged and acting in revenge of her daughters blah blah - are you saying there's a chance this would never have taken place if the army had been at peace instead of on campaign? That the uprising might have been planned anyway?
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
[Image: artgroepbutton.jpg]
Reply
(11-12-2015, 02:51 PM)Vindex Wrote: I'm not the Boss at all (not sure why you've said that as I'm no longer a Moderator either).
Sorry I hadn't realised you weren't a moderator, I will disregard your natural air of authority forthwith.....
Reply
A rare appearance from me....again.
Still getting used to new settings so be advised if anything goes wrong.
Re Moi's statement, Druids and so called Boudicca revolt have no connection at all as far as I am aware.
 One can argue this till the cows come home, but no evidence.
 STOP using Druids as a unit of people or otherwise to be used as an excuse for a rebellion.
 Druids should be a separate thread, and probably are if one searches hard enough.
 Those local peoples fought for a reason we will never know or understand....but they fought hard.
 To get back to the original subject of the thread.........Where was the Battle fought?
Mike Loades, some hate, I like him, gave us an idea of what the area would be like, as if we really did not know that already.
  I think, no matter who, no disrespect to any following before,  the fact of the matter,  We don't know.
 Say no more as I always get in trouble on this thread....Smile
Kevin
Reply
Shocked 
(11-12-2015, 08:04 PM)66kbm Wrote: Druids and so called Boudicca revolt have no connection at all as far as I am aware.

To be fair, the druids thing originally came up from a comment on the recent TV 'Celts' programme. But yes, ok - no more druids!

(11-12-2015, 08:04 PM)66kbm Wrote: Mike Loades, some hate, I like him, gave us an idea of what the area would be like

Ah, but he didn't! - his description of the site was different to the one in Tacitus. It's almost like he wasn't all that bothered or something!... [Image: shocked.png]

(11-12-2015, 08:04 PM)66kbm Wrote: the fact of the matter,  We don't know.

Yep. I'd go further - we can't know. Unless somebody turns up some conclusive archaeological evidence (tautology?). But that's why we keep discussing it, I suppose...
Nathan Ross
Reply
Nathan.....a discussion i'm into......OK, Mike Loades was not good with Druids.....Im not...either.

.thought he was meant to be an arms expert.. seen him do better with Roman with our group.......but better than anyone else I think. Back to location......Provided by the man, I thought was feasible, always a but.............
Could this battle have occurred and actually no one ever knew where it was? Its a possibility.
Kevin
Kevin
Reply
Robert Vermaat wrote:

As for the uprising itself, I agree that the campaign of Paulinus was very much of influence on the uprising. But was it planned that way? I mean, all that agonizing stuff about Boudicca being flogged and acting in revenge of her daughters blah blah - are you saying there's a chance this would never have taken place if the army had been at peace instead of on campaign? That the uprising might have been planned anyway?

It certainly is an interesting point. 

As has been said the army had been engaged in  "Summer Campaigns" for many years and had recently made large inroads, for the first time occupying the territories of the Silures, the Demetae and the Ordovices. Much of this would have had to have been garrisoned heavily (possibly by the Second Legion)

The Ninth possibly were garrisoning the borders of the Brigantes and the Iceni.

The Twentieth were possibly guarding the Eastern Borders of the Silures and the Ordovices.

The Fourteenth were possibly in camps along Watling Street.

If Paulinus had not removed the Fourteenth to Wroxeter and then on to Mona it would have been more difficult for an uprising to have taken place because possibly more troops would have been able to have been sent to Colchester to defend it properly and the military rather than the Administration would have been warned much earlier.

The risk to the Brythons would have been greater and the support for the uprising by the Trinovantes may have been nullified.

The Brythons must have been surprised when only 200 soldiers were sent to defend Colchester and no defences were raised. Colchester was then an easy target and the risk to the attackers was minimal and reprisal would have been delayed.

Deryk


 
Deryk
Reply
I've been struggling for a while to put the context of the battlesite into the geography of early Roman Britain. We had a discussion about the Iceni tribal boundaries a while back. Prompted by this I took a look at Chris Rudds 1998 map based on tribal coinage, this helped me pin tribes down geographically a bit more and whilst I know the boundaries were almost certainly fluid Rudds map is anchored on a few obvious features such as rivers that must surely have played a part boundary definition;
http://coinproject.com/jan/volume1/issue...1-4-2.html

Consequently I have attempted to almost, but not quite, overlay the Rudd map on to a copy of Briggs' still fantastic Roman road/topography map. Here it is;
   

Church Stowe is the blue dot and occupies a very interesting position at the border of 3 tribal areas, I could easily wiggle Rudds Dobunni/Catevellauni boundry to land on CS, I think it probably hits around Borough Hill, Daventry at the moment. Although a line following the Cherwell valley Northwards would be a sound idea thus ending at Arbury Hill 6km West of the CS site.

This area has a number of supposed Iron Age forts, Hunsbury, Arbury, CS, Borough Hill all within sight of each other. Maybe this area had some tribal significance as a meeting point? maybe it is a wider landscape of significance as a rallying point?

Does this map throw up any observations for any of the other sites?

Where, as a relative novice, should I be looking to get a better handle on the tribal divisions of the time?

Thanks for any input.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Armchair Wall walking mcbishop 3 2,544 01-11-2012, 03:22 AM
Last Post: Vindex

Forum Jump: