Calling all armchair generals! Boudica's Last Stand.

[John1]

1 - Chobham Common/Sunningdale could never be described as a "reasonable" alternative in this context. That's a complete evasion of topography as a determinant so you may as well throw away the narrative accounts, pin sticker.

   

2 - "Paulinus has no access to accurate topographical maps of the entirety of England (Britannia)" 
So maybe a site he had literally walked past twice in the preceding weeks on Watling Street known as a fortifiable from 47AD (Upex), possible depot fro the Mona campaign, river served, central to the II, IX and XX garrisons and London, within striking distance of Iceni land and far enough North for his main force to not be attacked from the east, might be a reasonable site to pick even if he didn't have access to the lidar which makes it a great candidate? Seems an obvious strategy rather than crossing the Thames to non-valley having abandoned all the campaign gains to the North West..... You make my point for me.... Let VW rest in peace.... it really doesn't need disturbing again... it passes no reasonable test.

3 -  Tring does pass some topography tests but fails several others... too open at the rear, no possibility of dense woodland, easy to out flank .... It is worth noting how dramatically narrower the Church Stowe valley is than that of Tring. On site the two valleys have an entirely different scale.

   

Feels like 2019 all over again......

PS Renatus, have you done a field trip to Church Stowe? If not, you should....

[Renatus]

with the web site down i am just working from memory, something about eh two circles hills and the proximity to Alcester.... but I didn't pay a massive amount of attention to it once I'd seen the topography

I'm working from memory too but, as far as I recall, he argued that the site had to be east of Alchester, as Alchester showed no signs of the destruction it would have suffered if it had been overrun by the rebels.  Of his two sites, one coincided with the site of Bulllingdon Prison, which was in a defile, and the other was to the north-east of the first, which was not.  At first, he favoured the first alternative but then changed his mind.  The second alternative had a very narrow defile leading to it and he seems to have been misled by the 'approached by a narrow defile' mistranslation.

[Nathan Ross]

That's a complete evasion of topography as a determinant

   

Oh, come now! It's called Sunningdale, not Sunningfield, or Sunningflats.

Actually that looks a lot nicer than I was expecting. At least as good as most of those other places you showed us above.

maybe a site he had literally walked past twice in the preceding weeks on Watling Street... possible depot fro the Mona campaign...

If he was advancing from Wales towards Colchester he would have bypassed Church Stowe entirely. No reason to think he was looking for battle sites in that area anyway, unless he had already read Webster...

And I still don't know why a depot for a campaign in North Wales would be placed in the middle of England, especially when the more convenient Wroxeter is available, and was a known legion base at the time.

The convolutions required to get both armies to the pre-selected site at CS remain unlikely, IMO.

Feels like 2019 all over again......

Funnily enough, I've been feeling like that about all sort of things lately!

[John1]

"Sunningdale" seems to be a late naming due to it being the "downy" bit next to Sunning Hill. Any pre-1811 references to the place name would be appreciated. It's late naming might explain why a northern toponym is being adopted.... the name has no bearing on the sites lack of elevation.

"Better than expected" and "at least as good as most of the other places" Might have some merit as a comment, most shown above are so outrageously weak that they shouldn't be included in any relative analysis that takes topography seriously as a determinant. If however the "many" includes either Tring or Church Stowe...

"If he was advancing from Wales to Colchester he would have bypassed Church Stowe entirely"

The red line is a direct line from Wroxeter to Colchester, some deviation might have to be accounted for however you choose to tell the story..... but basically this is as the crow flies, although I prefer to assume the line of what is now Watling Street was a more likely specific route at least as far as Church Stowe...

The little "X"  is the site of Church Stowe. Of course his force passed Church Stowe on the way up and the way down....... unless they were sea borne... or took a strangely circuitous route to an unlikely destination.

   

Depots.... if there were depots/marshalling areas in safe territory that would be an excellent site for jumping off or just storing stuff such as the lead shot at Windridge (it's a ploughed up cache not a battlefield scatter) ..... once we have Castle Dykes and Castle Yard firmly dated to Roman (or not) we can riff on that.. until then we rely on Upex's Nene line of 47AD as a known military landscape with features... what military doesn't have strategically placed depots?

This narrative is so clean and straight forward you shouldn't be having convulsions.... can I suggest you take a day trip or two to look at the ground.

[Nathan Ross]

"Sunningdale" seems to be a late naming... pre-1811 references to the place name would be appreciated.

I was joking about the name...

see the red line? that a direct line from Wroxeter to Colchester

I know Romans built straight roads, but not that straight!

Trace the route on a map of actual Roman roads. It does not go via Church Stowe.

(That's to say, you could detour that way if you like, but only if you knew that you would need to march down to London next, or that you might want to retreat again all the way up Watling Street trailed by your enemy for day after day like some sort of parade, after surrendering the high ground of the Chilterns, just to fight a battle in the Midlands many miles from where you'd started... But I digress!)

[John1]

"trace the route on a map of actual Roman roads. It does not go via Church Stowe"

Watling Street is an actual Roman Road and Church Stowe is very close.  Just how many centimetres off Watling Street is too many ?????

   

Emphasises the quality of a closed valley (for Renatus), an open valley would have a track through it so NOT closed at the rear....

[Nathan Ross]

Just how many centimetres off Watling Street is too many ?????

See for yourself. The little red star is Church Stowe

   

[John1]

That assumes Watling Street isn't the most obvious route, we differ there.

Some more likely alternatives south of Towcester here https://keithbriggs.info/images/Roman_roads_all.png

   

[Renatus]

Emphasises the quality of a closed valley (for Renatus), an open valley would have a track through it so NOT closed at the rear....

Don't try to convince me.  Convince Tacitus.

[John1]

OK, just trying to help with your query, never mind....

[Nathan Ross]

That assumes Watling street isn't the most obvious route, we differ there.

Yes. Although if a general wishes to march against a massive tribal rebellion threatening one of the most important cities in his province, he would take the quickest and most direct route, surely?

Unless he wanted to detour immediately to London, he would not continue down Watling Street south of Mancetter or High Cross.

If he learned of Colchester's fall only when he reached Mancetter, let's say, he could force-march down Watling Street to London in about five days. 

But unless he somehow knew that he was intending to retreat again all the way back into the Midlands, or planned to do that, he would not be looking at sites around there to fight his battle.

Some more likely alternatives south of Towcester here

The direct route from Wales to Colchester goes via Godmanchester, up the top right quadrant of that map.

The point is (and we've been through all this many times, of course!) that we can construct plausible narratives to bring Suetonius Paulinus to pretty much anywhere in southeastern England. Your idea of a dash south and then a regrouping in the Midlands, coupled with an Iceni return to their homelands and then a push west, might indeed be the case - I can't see why a battle would be happening in the Midlands if any of these things did not happen. But generally I prefer simpler solutions to these problems, requiring fewer additional elements to those outlined in our sources. That means looking at sites in the close vicinity of London and St Albans.

We are unlikely to agree on either of our preferred options, so unless and until more evidence comes to light, or somebody else offers a truly compelling alternative, we shall have to hold our positions, you in your defile and I in mine!

[John1]

As we were..... In defiles.... The defiles missing from the recent candidates that were the topic of these recent exchanges. It's a shame advocates for the defile-less candidates have yet to step up with meaningful statements to refute the obvious reading of Tacitus that we actually might share. My concern is that if the lack of defile is not called out it will be a licence for some to punt more silly site nominations with no topography and no write up. 2023 was a bad/regressive year for debate on the topic.

"I prefer simpler solutions to these problems" Agreed.

My "simple" is rally all forces (including II and remains of IX) at a central point that is relatively secure and located to strike a full range of directions South and South East. Figure out what, and where, the enemy is then either strike or bring them onto your prepared position depending on what your recce tells you of real numbers and real locations. But we differ.

[Renatus]

OK, just trying to help with your query, never mind....

With respect, you miss the point.  I queried that your closed valley did not correspond with Tacitus' description of a valley protected at the rear by a wood, not by high ground.  Merely stating the merits of a closed valley does not address this issue.

As we were..... In defiles.... The defiles missing from the other recent candidates that were the topic of these recent exchanges. Its a shame advocates for the defile-less candidates have yet to step up with meaningful statements to refute the obvious reading of Tacitus that we actually might share. My concern is that if the lack of defile is not called out it will be a licence for some to punt more silly site nominations with no topography and no write up. 2023 was a bad/regressive year for debate on the topic.

Now that's something we can agree upon.

My "simple" is rally all forces (including II and remains of IX) at a central point that is secure and located to strike a full range of direction South and South East. Figure out what and where the enemy is then either strike or bring them onto your prepared position depending on what your recce tells you of real numbers and real locations. But we differ.

That might explain what Suetonius was doing but what brought Boudica there?

[John1]

I am sorry you feel I missed your point, maybe my reply was, like the description by Tacitus, incomplete. 

My point was that the site was certainly backed by woods but that does not rule out the site also having high ground to the rear as well if placed within the descriptive "forcibus". The two characteristics are not mutually exclusive and we know Tacitus to be poor or abbreviated with site description. His lack of precision in describing the specific topography is reasonable and a potential omission which we have to take account of and allow latitude for.

Your interpretation seems to be that Tacitus states the rear is only protected by woodland, my view is that this could equally be that the rear is protected by woodland and still retain the advantage of the forcibus topography .... this doesn't seem too big a leap to me, particularly when the advantages of a rare closed valley are so obvious and the text so thin..

That we agree on the problem the debate faces by nominees evading the topography issue is good. But these weak sites, and the methodologies that they result from, need to be called out. This should either focus the debate and resources or may help to reduce the negative image the study of this topic seems to have amongst academics, individuals who either won't look, won't engage or persist in giving unworthy credibility to the analysis of Fuentes and Webster, whilst ignoring Frere's suggestion the site is north west of Towcester... (if anyone knows who made the "reasonable guess" Frere refers to could you drop it to me please (Britannia: A History of Roman Britain))

   

Note at the top of the clip Paulinus is rejoining his column having been down to London with his cavalry. He doesn't use the term "Cavalry Dash" but he certainly recognises the advanced reconnaissance in force in 1967, pre dating the Fuentes article by 16 years, making Fuentes the rebel taking on the old boys of the establishment by pejoratively characterising a reasonable recce tactic as a "Dash".

The North West sector of Towcester looks like this (guess what the red splodge represents ????)

   

"But what brought Boudicca there"

1, A chariot, or maybe just a horse.

2, Looking for a fight, the odds and impetus were in the Iceni's favour.

3, She may have had little say in the matter. We have to be sensible about her poor command and communication, and her status. Tacitus makes her the star of the show but we know the world isn't like that. Perceived Leaders are more often just cyphers, he needed a dramatic focus, she became one (or maybe was invented to be one). In reality we have 100 000+ twenty something males feeling they are on a roll, buoyed up by blood lust and pillage, they are off to find the hated bad guys to hand out the punishment beating of all punishment beatings and reap the rewards. The lads were going to find the Romans and have a fight, she could opt out (for no good reason) or go with the flow.

We're in Green Street mind set rather than Sandhurst and that is one of the core lessons Tacitus seeks to teach his readers. This was far from a professional army so applying formal military models to the British side just won't work.

   

4, Positioned to the North East of Iceni home territory, holding the heart of the island the Roman force is an existential threat to the Iceni that they could not accept. Once the short period where momentum and fast dwindling supplies closes the British force will never reassemble. No force of scale will be available to provide a meaningful defence to the open approach to Iceni territory would ever again be recruited. This was the moment to lance the Roman boil and the strategic threat it posed at the head of the two main approach routes to Iceni-land from the west.

Don't forget how close Church Stowe is to Iceni territory (Thrapston, based on Will Bowden's definition BFT 2023). 25 miles of easy going river valley. This is the point where Watling Street is at it's closest to Iceni territory and probably the easiest route into its heartlands. 

   

5, The Brits may not even have been entirely aware of the size of the Roman force and thought they were mopping up (not that the number would have put them off) nor might they be aware of the terrain the Romans were holding. 17 years of non-martial culture in the Brecklands would provide little to no skill or experience for strategizing or fighting in this more dramatic terrain.

721,089

[Renatus]

Your interpretation seems to be that Tacitus states the rear is only protected by woodland, my view is that this could equally be that the rear is protected by woodland and retains the advantage of the forcibus topography .... this doesn't seem too big a leap to me, particularly when the advantages of a rare closed valley are so obvious and the text so thin..

I think we have to define our terms here.  What are you calling 'forcibus topography'?