(09-13-2021, 02:40 PM)[email protected] Wrote: A couple of months ago and new to this, I directed people to my website Boudiccaslostbattlefound.com. The replies ranged from factual to petty. This was my first attempt at web work and yes a number of silly mistakes have been dealt with. However, I must reply to the few comments. Firstly, I used a combat estimate for my findings, the whole purpose of which is to give options/assumptions. This point has completely been missed by those who read it. This is a novel way of locating the battlefield. As for the comment the maps do not show what I mean - then yes to some degree. Though this is purely because I do not wish to pay for it. If your IT skills are better then mine then go and look at the actual proper maps. Again, the many points in the doc have been missed and if I have to resort to 'shouty' capitals to make them then so be it. One point I did make is the ground is all - the ground is everything. The 2 locations I stated by Bicester match all the historical criteria. Though I admit I should have come down on my favorite. Other people seem to be going around in endless circles on this subject. I have the location - come back to me when you have 40 years militray experience of siting weapons, tactics, fieldcraft and ISTAR (look it up) as well as 10 operational deployments and 4 wars including being on Regional Command South HQ in Afghanistan at the height of the conflict where I was again witness to how generals (we had 5 in all) think.
(09-20-2021, 04:15 PM)Renatus Wrote:(09-13-2021, 02:40 PM)[email protected] Wrote: come back to me when you have 40 years militray experience of siting weapons, tactics, fieldcraft and ISTAR (look it up) as well as 10 operational deployments and 4 wars including being on Regional Command South HQ in Afghanistan at the height of the conflict where I was again witness to how generals (we had 5 in all) think.
I think we can do without this sort of thing.
Especially since none of that is of any relevance.
What is relevant is using 272 imperial miles from Anglesey to London, and using 24 Roman miles a day (18 imperial miles) marching speed to establish a time line, and so get it wrong from the very start, or that the Romans were using whistles in combat when there is no litany or textual evidence that they were us d.
