Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand.

[[email protected]]

This is for the doubting Johns and others who ooze negativity and contribute nothing of value to those who try. In 2013, after a full, militray career I put forward my theories on a unique way of locating Boudiccas lost battlefield. Then a year later my dream job came up in the reserves and I was the perfect candidate. Now retired again, I have relooked at Boudiccaslostbattlefield.com and for a number of reasons now think that my alternative Dio battlefield near Brill is the location.

The recent comments by the Prof that the battlefield will never be found is systematic of the way modern archeology thinks. What have the experts found of great value recently? It took a writer with a strange feeling in a car park to uncover one of the UKs greatest mysteries. Unless you have a string of academic credentials to your name they are not interested. By the way, this is just not my comment but someone else actively engaged in locating lost Roman Battlefields.

Putting this all to one side, 8 years later on, I much improved my search methods using militray IPB, IPE and ISTAR and so in Nov 2020, I started a fresh search to locate Caratacus lost battlefield only to find the same misguided theories. It is not any of the Caer Caradocs, Coxall Knoll, British Camp or Llanymymech. Neither it is as stated by Martin Hackett at Llandinam hills. Though it must be said full credit must go to him for actually thinking it out but there are serious mistakes from a military viewpoint; the length of the ramparts, the distance from the river etc. Also Tacitus does not state that Caratacus last stand was at a hillfort. If it were, surely, he would have mentioned it. Most of these locations cater for the tourism trade and are missing vital identifiable topographical features and display none of Caratacus superior cunning.

So, after a combat appreciation I had a list of 20 criteria the site must have and I found a unique location. The site had everything, in prime Caratacus country, in a remote location largely untouched by modern man within an enclosed country estate with limited public access. My then metal detecting partner had a major health scare and so his priorities was elsewhere. After a presentation of 2 hrs., permission was obtained from the landowner and after 40 hrs. of metal detecting, I came to the conclusion it was not the site. Why? The site had everything and the pictures were fantastic, including remains of stones ramparts on slopes above a river. Why was it not the site that is the question I had to ask myself. Recently a Liberal canvasser came calling for the forthcoming elections. By her face i could tell that she really was trying. I knew the feeling. I had really tried on this one.

I submitted an article to a Metal Detecting magazine on my search complete with photos. The editor really liked it and I think was convinced I had the location and that I should try again. But being a failure, I am now glad it did not go into print. On first impression, the site has it all. But was let down on two major features which were simply not suitable. So, a year later in the cold light of day it was time for an overdue washup and what did I conclude. The criteria was spot on. It was the detail within it that needed more attention to and that the location is even more deceptive and cunning than even I previously had thought. With only the added introduction of one word it set me off in a different direction and I now firmly believe I have found the location. There is nothing like it. There are also 2 revelations. One has been staring everyone in the face and now looking back it makes perfect sense. The other revelation, after extensive research for my paper, concerns the local history and stretches back over a 100 years to Edwardian times and a mystery.
So, yet again I am now prepared to travel long distances and go though it all again. To that end I am informing you of this quest and yet again Tacitus is exactly right. I now seek an experienced metal detecting partner. I could (and probably will end up doing it by myself which is OK) detect it alone but would rather detect it with someone. if there is anyone suitable out there my E mail is on the Boudicca site. Originally I thought the quest would be a forlorn hope yet the ground now tells me otherwise. I have learnt from my mistakes and yes, the location is even more deceptive and hidden than anyone has previously thought. Happy sniping.

[MonsGraupius]

This is for the doubting Johns and others who ooze negativity and contribute nothing of value to those who try. In 2013, after a full, militray career .... Happy sniping.

Is that a full milktray career or a fool ... (you did ask us to snipe).

Unfortunately, you don't give any links to your proposal, so I can't snipe about that ... but if you would like me to comment on it, could you provide a link. But I do like your approach of listing criteria and then looking for a site. The problem I would have is that I found the original texts do not say what many people assume they say, and too often people using your approach start from the narrative that has been fabricated by academics rather than what was actually said.

[[email protected]]

This is for the doubting Johns and others who ooze negativity and contribute nothing of value to those who try. In 2013, after a full, militray career .... Happy sniping.

Is that a full milktray career or a fool ... (you did ask us to snipe).

Unfortunately, you don't give any links to your proposal, so I can't snipe about that ... but if you would like me to comment on it, could you provide a link. But I do like your approach of listing criteria and then looking for a site. The problem I would have is that I found the original texts do not say what many people assume they say, and too often people using your approach start from the narrative that has been fabricated by academics rather than what was actually said.

---

On Caratacus last stand. Yes - spelling is unfortunately not my forte (nor my English). On a few certain key words, I am indeed Dyslexic and rushed it (when I was in the military, this was not a problem as military Emails have a spell checker).

I will say this on your comment, it is important to note that in Roman writing, accurate historical fact was just one secondary aspect. It was the literary style that took precedence. As such there are indeed, many different translations of Tacitus with different interpretations including elements suggested by various authors. In my search I chose two of the most renowned translations which I considered the most authentic because of the terrain I discovered (90% matches anyway and on the most important parts it is a 100% match). A single word added in by a mistranslation can indeed throw the whole search out as I learnt to my cost.

The site I have found, matches the main translations. I again went through every map and grid square using a color code and it has taken 15 months to locate the place. If this was easy everyone would have found it. Interestingly, please note how many people have actually nominated a site and how few have provided any evidence. I can think of only one - Martin Hackett. I would have started my search earlier this year but have been delayed due to the weather and other matters. I am going to do this and if I cannot get landowners permission, then I will publish my evidence on it and leave it to others to judge. PS As stated my earlier efforts 9 years before pale in comparison to where I am now. This is a journey and as such begins with the first step. Watch this space. I am coming.

[MonsGraupius]

On Caratacus last stand. Yes - spelling is unfortunately not my forte (nor my English). On a few certain key words, I am indeed Dyslexic and rushed it (when I was in the military, this was not a problem as military Emails have a spell checker).

I will say this on your comment, it is important to note that in Roman writing, accurate historical fact was just one secondary aspect. It was the literary style that took precedence. As such there are indeed, many different translations of Tacitus with different interpretations including elements suggested by various authors. In my search I chose two of the most renowned translations which I considered the most authentic because of the terrain I discovered (90% matches anyway and on the most important parts it is a 100% match). A single word added in by a mistranslation can indeed throw the whole search out as I learnt to my cost.

The site I have found, matches the main translations. I again went through every map and grid square using a color code and it has taken 15 months to locate the place. If this was easy everyone would have found it. Interestingly, please note how many people have actually nominated a site and how few have provided any evidence. I can think of only one - Martin Hackett. I would have started my search earlier this year but have been delayed due to the weather and other matters. I am going to do this and if I cannot get landowners permission, then I will publish my evidence on it and leave it to others to judge. PS As stated my earlier efforts 9 years before pale in comparison to where I am now. This is a journey and as such begins with the first step. Watch this space. I am coming.

I thought "all because the lady loves Milk tray" ... was based on special forces!

On translation ... it's well worth checking the actual meaning of key words. I've come across some real howlers. Like for example a translation saying "the celts did this" ... when it turned out to be a tribe in Germany. (Batavaria?? ... dimly comes to mind). Another example is Tacitus's record of Calgacus' speech which constantly refers to a word that was translated as "slave". "They will make us slaves". Which I found also could be translated "they will make us servants". I then realised that the speech had been translated to be an "anti-slavery" speech.

Also, the original translators were extremely prudish ... and the Romans were not. That can lead to some obscure translations!

I've had the benefit of finding the battle of Mons Graupius, and then several years later having another look at my evidence. Bizarrely, although there is more evidence for a fort than I had originally found (it shows up on Lidar quite distinctly), having been up to metal detect without even the slightest trace of conflict in the most likely place that it should have shown up, and given that roman finds have been found about a day's march away, I would now list two sites as being similarly probable.

The lessons from that experience were ... even with a huge amount of detail about the battle site, and clear Roman archaeology leading like a trail of dots toward the likely battle site, you need to be cautious about too much enthusiasm. Secondly, unless you have enormous enthusiasm and a certainty you have the right site, you won't get any press interest, thirdly, all academics seem to have a "not invented here" syndrome. I've sent aerial photos showing what was almost certainly multiple overlaid buildings in a site reported as likely to have a Roman fort ... and I didn't even get a reply ... I think it's because unless they can claim they found it, they really have no interest. And finally ... every academic has their own pet theory about key battles etc., and many have written papers by cherry picking the evidence to build sometimes really absurd cases for the pet theories ... and you could show them absolutely clear evidence or a site, but because it will only highly how they cherry picked the evidence to fit their theory, they don't want to have anything at all to do with you.

And finally ... I'm so ****ed off with academics that I've no chance of even "smooth talking" them enough to get any success. You need to have the ability to make these dullards feel like they are the most important people in the world and that they (having done no work at all) were the ones who actually found the site.

[John1]

Hate to fulfil the "doubting" label but I "doubt" this approach is going to get much quality collaboration. You might want to re-think your engagement strategies.

[MonsGraupius]

Hate to fulfil the "doubting" label but I "doubt" this approach is going to get much quality collaboration. You might want to re-think your engagement strategies.

John, in my experience of similar sites, quality collaboration doesn't mean academia, that's because academia is now focussed on getting out yet another paper ...  which means manipulating the evidence so as to fit another site. It doesn't mean working with someone from outside academia to help them get publicity for their discovery. Yes, if they can take over someone else's work and claim it as their own ... then they are really keen ... to hear what you have to say, then take over. Or, if they don't think they'll get funding ... but might get paper by a little bit of help ... then they are keen.

But the simple fact is this: most of the sites that are found, were found first by someone outside academia, but you'd never know that from the lack of credit given to those who did the donkey work before the academics move in to make their money and take the credit.

If that sounds downbeat ... it's because I'm just being realistic.

[[email protected]]

Re Caratacus. I will state a taste of some small morsels I have discovered re Caratacus to prove I am not a 'Walt' which I have never read before by any of our exalted experts who put out utter trash (like a Sky prog about Roman Gaul last night on TV.)
Firstly, the Caratacus battlefield is much smaller than many experts state. Why - only rogue war-bands supported Caratacus and not the full weight of either the Siluries or Ordovices tribe (remember the Siluries threw him out of their territory).
Secondly, the ramparts (2 points re Tacitus) at my site measure together a combined distance of 250 m. If 8 tribesmen (masses) stood lined up 1 behind the other that equates to... work it out. It is not the 10,000 or 20,000 some state.
Thirdly, Rome fought what is called a combined arms battle with artillery and cavalry etc. Their use was never mentioned by Tacitus in this battle who mentioned them in other battles. Why - because the ground did not allow their use. Though undoubtedly cavalry formed part of the battle-group.
Fourthly; the experts say 2 Legions participated. Are we to assume that after hard won victories in other places they simply abandoned their garrisons to go on a jolly. No - it was elements of 2 legions which took part in the campaign (remember 10 years later Paulinus only had 10,000 men available for mobile ops in the much more dangerous Boudicca rebellion).
Their numbers on the Caratacus campaign, even with aux will also not be huge.
Fifth point; the Romans crossed the river without difficulty and only at the ramparts did they suffer serious casualties from missiles. If anyone has the sense to work out a criteria from this then welcome to the club. The Romans then formed Testudo. How wide would that formation be at the front- maybe 20 m max. Therefore the actual break in point at the ramparts is only that distance. This is where the dead were piled up. Find that point and you will find all the evidence required in the ground. All it takes is a single Caratacus coin.
I could go on to discuss the major criteria but as previously stated in other posts that is for another time. Once I stopped jumping out of perfectly serviceable RAF airplanes, I progressed to trg development and course design. I cannot remember the exact words when embarking on a new project though it went something like this; Stage 1: Initial enthusiasm for task. 2. Request for more time. 3. Request denied. 4. Honor's and awards for the non-participants. My, my things never change. On the first Caratacus site, from which I learned so many good things, I ventured into some of the worst ground I have ever encountered, thick brambles, thorn bushes and my favorite one of all - large Holly trees. My new site is nothing like that so yes I have regained my enthusiasm and am at stage 1. If someone with enough vision wants to join in and perhaps make history rather than just read about it, then good luck to them.

[MonsGraupius]

Fifth point; the Romans crossed the river without difficulty and only at the ramparts did they suffer serious casualties from missiles. If anyone has the sense to work out a criteria from this then welcome to the club. The Romans then formed Testudo. How wide would that formation be at the front- maybe 20 m max. Therefore the actual break in point at the ramparts is only that distance. This is where the dead were piled up. Find that point and you will find all the evidence required in the ground. All it takes is a single Caratacus coin.

I could assess the river crossing for you and say how likely it would be at a flow that was "without difficulty".

In terms of the battle finds, if you haven't done so, I suggest looking at Burnswick and Kalkriese. These will give a very good idea of what kinds of things are likely to be found on a battlefield.

[Hus]

I don't understand.

Why did the UNRV site - on one of their intro pages, say that the IInd Legion DID fight alongside Paulinus at that last battle?

I thought it was stated they didn't

[John1]

"In terms of the battle finds, if you haven't done so, I suggest looking at Burnswick and Kalkriese" That has to be tempered with looking at Hastings where we know the battlefield location but finds are entirely absent. That is, I think, the biggest challenge this quest faces, absence of finds and depths of soil horizons in the valley bottoms of any putative sites. At CS we were at the limit of detector depth and getting 15th century material due to the soil development at the base of steep slopes that had been forested for centuries before clearance.

644,656

[MonsGraupius]

That has to be tempered with looking at Hastings where we know the battlefield location but finds are entirely absent. That is I think the biggest challenge this quest faces,

Very good point! There is also a Roman battle in Greece (Pharsalus), where there are around half a dozen accounts describing the location between the river and the hill with reference to a settlement (Old Pharsalus). Yet despite such detail, I am not aware of even one artefact being recovered from the site.

[Owein Walker]

"In terms of the battle finds, if you haven't done so, I suggest looking at Burnswick and Kalkriese" That has to be tempered with looking at Hastings where we know the battlefield location but finds are entirely absent. That is, I think, the biggest challenge this quest faces, absence of finds and depths of soil horizons in the valley bottoms of any putative sites. At CS we were at the limit of detector depth and getting 15th century material due to the soil development at the base of steep slopes that had been forested for centuries before clearance.

644,656

Charlotte Walker(HER) has some aerial photographs showing several large areas of darkened soil in the valley floor ,possible mass cremation sites.This won't need a metal detector!
Quote
"This is really quite exciting, we haven't seen anything like this before, and at least you've found something!(gentle laughter)."
The ditches have already been recorded along with some other structures and features.

As for the professor, he is behind the times and needs to get with it a bit.

[John1]

"Charlotte Walker(HER)" a relative Owein, or your weekday persona?

[Owein Walker]

"Charlotte Walker(HER)" a relative Owein, or your weekday persona?

Just a coincidence among a series of coincidences, big boy.

[MonsGraupius]

Hate to fulfil the "doubting" label but I "doubt" this approach is going to get much quality collaboration. You might want to re-think your engagement strategies.

I've recently come across some quite appalling behaviour from academics who literally refused to even acknowledge an email after I left some things for them. Fortunately, they were just rocks of no particular value (which they asked for) ... but they had asked for them, before I got them ... so very strange behaviour. I have found that this year in particularly academics are behaving very strangely and not even responding to very polite emails just looking for people with an interest in niche subjects.

Based on my own experience, I would wait till next year in the hope that things improve ... or maybe they'll all be on strike!