09-13-2022, 11:30 PM
[quote pid="352868" dateline="1663100306"]
I have this from 'London city of the Romans'by Ralph Merrifield .
BRITAIN BETWEEN THE INVASIONS P18
For a brief period he also issued coins at Camulodunum, and his coins are widely distributed in Essex. If the spread of coins is an indication of political influence, as is usually assumed, Tasciovanus [died c. 9 AD] seems to have exercised some measure of control over a fair part of eastern Britain north of the Thames and south of the Fens, and also in north Kent. It seems that a powerful kingdom consisting of a federation of tribes north of the Thames was established, and an extension of its power south of the river had been achieved over the peoples of north Kent. The rule of Tasciovanus was contested by a rival named Athedomarus [died ?? <5BC], however, whose coins are found extending over much of the same area north of the Thames. A successor or conqueror of Athedomarus was Dudnovellaunus,a Kentish king who also ruled in Essex.
In this confusing struggle for power, Cunobelinus, the son of Tasciovanus, finally emerged as the victor, and from the distribution of his coins recovered control over all the territory north and south of the Thames that was ever ruled by his father. He made Camulodunum his capitol, and it was here that his coins were minted.
Until the reign of Cunobelinus, the southern bank of the Thames to the west of the Kentish tribes had remained the northern boundary of the Atrebatic kingdom established by Commius, which extended to the south coast in Hampshire and West Sussex. This dynasty was weakened by internal dissension, and Cunobelinus gained control of the Thames in this western area also, where soon after 20 AD his brother Epaticcus was established as ruler in the northern tribal centre of the Atrebates at Calleva(Silchester)............IT GOES ON
This also begs the question of how safe was Silchester?
I recommend this book and the author,Ralph Merrifield, 'father of London's modern archaeology ', and thank him for the work he did .
[/quote]
First the print was 1983 ...second ... don't tell my wife I ordered a copy because the bookcases are already overflowing.
I've read so much rubbish about "Celtic" Britain, however, it actually sounds like this guy did some research and is using actual evidence to form his views ... how refreshing ...I didn't know there were real historians of the British in this period.
Some really useful information. I think I can develop that a bit.
We are told by Caesar that there was an invasion ... I think "within living memory" or something like, and Tacitus I think it is that tells us there was a Belgae invasion of the nearer shores. And, archaeology shows a set of new artefacts and burial rights appearing in the SE around 100-200BC, from which I put the Belgae invasion as 150BC.
Commius and the Atrebates are clearly Belgae, as are the Belgae, not much is known about the Regni, but I suspect they are also Belgae elites. The Cantiaci are "The most like Gauls" ... so, probably the highest influx of Belgae Gauls.
I think Cunobelinus and Boudica are British, which means there was British control North of the Thames and in North Kent. So, the Gallic coins are used by both Belgae and British elites, which allows me to suggest the Catuvellauni & Corieltauvi are in the same British group as the Iceni and Trinovantes. Gallic coins are not used in Wales, Devon and Cornwall or by the Brigantes. These groups correspond in area to the later Welsh areas (Strathclyde, Cumbria, Wales Domnonia) and non-Welsh Northhumbrians.
Pœnius Postumus was presumably in Exeter near the Damnonii ... who are presumably related to the other western tribes in Wales who Suetonius had been fighting and perhaps overtly hostile to Romans. This leaves the Durotriges & Dobunni. If Postumus feels unable to leave the SW Exeter? That might suggest that the Durotriges & perhaps Dobunni are not pro-Roman - or at least, like Brigantes, willing to take the opportunity presented by the revolt and attack Romans.
[quote pid="352868" dateline="1663100306"]
This also begs the question of how safe was Silchester?
[/quote]
I think Suetonius could rely on support from the Belgae elite meaning: Atrebates, Belgae, Regnii, and south Cantiaci. I think the north Cantiaci may have been suspect and the Durotriges very suspect (to keep Postumus pinned down).
I think Suetonius can rely on the tribes north of the Thames being hostile, as well as all the tribes of the west (Wales, Cornwall). However, these were probably not allies with the Iceni, so no coordinated attack.
I suspect the Brigantes were hostile to Rome, but there is little evidence of the Corieltauvi being hostile.
As a result, I think Suetonius has even more problems than I first suggested. He cannot afford the Iceni to bring in the North Cantiaci into the revolt, so he first has to deal with the N.Cantiaci to secure the south of Britain.
Likewise, he cannot afford to lose the SW ... so he needs Postumus to stay in the SW to secure his western flank. I would suggest Postumus needs to be controlling the area right up to Gloucester and even into the lower Severn valley.
Having secured his left and right flanks, Suetonius is then able to move to either Silchester, from which he can launch an offensive moving up the Chilterns towards Norfolk, or alternatively, Suetonius would camp south of the Thames, in preparation for a forced crossing of the Thames ...but I think, given his inferiority in numbers, he cannot afford to waste lots of troops on a forced crossing. In his situation, that it is not going to be something he can do. He wants an unopposed crossing of the Thames, so a part of the Thames with plenty of crossing to choose from which he can only get upstream of Goring. Moreover, he wants easy supply lines, so he wants to control the crossing and Dorchester would give that control.
As he moves NE along the base of the Chilterns, the Iceni in St.Albans risk being caught between Suetonius and the Thames "moat". They either have to fight or retreat. This encircling movement may be what provoked the battle.
With a lot of diplomacy and Roman gold to keep the luke warm supporters on side, and with auxiliaries from the Belgae, I think Suetonius could have a strong position. Boudica's army, forced out of St.Albans is then forced to assemble somewhere North to North east ... perhaps near Letchworth ... a long way from the Iceni capital. Suetonius sits near Aylesbury, perhaps two days march from his seat of war at Silchester. When the Boudica hoard finally advances, Suetonius moves to his preferred valley on the Chilterns to take his stance and await Boudica.
I have this from 'London city of the Romans'by Ralph Merrifield .
BRITAIN BETWEEN THE INVASIONS P18
For a brief period he also issued coins at Camulodunum, and his coins are widely distributed in Essex. If the spread of coins is an indication of political influence, as is usually assumed, Tasciovanus [died c. 9 AD] seems to have exercised some measure of control over a fair part of eastern Britain north of the Thames and south of the Fens, and also in north Kent. It seems that a powerful kingdom consisting of a federation of tribes north of the Thames was established, and an extension of its power south of the river had been achieved over the peoples of north Kent. The rule of Tasciovanus was contested by a rival named Athedomarus [died ?? <5BC], however, whose coins are found extending over much of the same area north of the Thames. A successor or conqueror of Athedomarus was Dudnovellaunus,a Kentish king who also ruled in Essex.
In this confusing struggle for power, Cunobelinus, the son of Tasciovanus, finally emerged as the victor, and from the distribution of his coins recovered control over all the territory north and south of the Thames that was ever ruled by his father. He made Camulodunum his capitol, and it was here that his coins were minted.
Until the reign of Cunobelinus, the southern bank of the Thames to the west of the Kentish tribes had remained the northern boundary of the Atrebatic kingdom established by Commius, which extended to the south coast in Hampshire and West Sussex. This dynasty was weakened by internal dissension, and Cunobelinus gained control of the Thames in this western area also, where soon after 20 AD his brother Epaticcus was established as ruler in the northern tribal centre of the Atrebates at Calleva(Silchester)............IT GOES ON
This also begs the question of how safe was Silchester?
I recommend this book and the author,Ralph Merrifield, 'father of London's modern archaeology ', and thank him for the work he did .
[/quote]
First the print was 1983 ...second ... don't tell my wife I ordered a copy because the bookcases are already overflowing.
I've read so much rubbish about "Celtic" Britain, however, it actually sounds like this guy did some research and is using actual evidence to form his views ... how refreshing ...I didn't know there were real historians of the British in this period.
Some really useful information. I think I can develop that a bit.
We are told by Caesar that there was an invasion ... I think "within living memory" or something like, and Tacitus I think it is that tells us there was a Belgae invasion of the nearer shores. And, archaeology shows a set of new artefacts and burial rights appearing in the SE around 100-200BC, from which I put the Belgae invasion as 150BC.
Commius and the Atrebates are clearly Belgae, as are the Belgae, not much is known about the Regni, but I suspect they are also Belgae elites. The Cantiaci are "The most like Gauls" ... so, probably the highest influx of Belgae Gauls.
I think Cunobelinus and Boudica are British, which means there was British control North of the Thames and in North Kent. So, the Gallic coins are used by both Belgae and British elites, which allows me to suggest the Catuvellauni & Corieltauvi are in the same British group as the Iceni and Trinovantes. Gallic coins are not used in Wales, Devon and Cornwall or by the Brigantes. These groups correspond in area to the later Welsh areas (Strathclyde, Cumbria, Wales Domnonia) and non-Welsh Northhumbrians.
Pœnius Postumus was presumably in Exeter near the Damnonii ... who are presumably related to the other western tribes in Wales who Suetonius had been fighting and perhaps overtly hostile to Romans. This leaves the Durotriges & Dobunni. If Postumus feels unable to leave the SW Exeter? That might suggest that the Durotriges & perhaps Dobunni are not pro-Roman - or at least, like Brigantes, willing to take the opportunity presented by the revolt and attack Romans.
[quote pid="352868" dateline="1663100306"]
This also begs the question of how safe was Silchester?
[/quote]
I think Suetonius could rely on support from the Belgae elite meaning: Atrebates, Belgae, Regnii, and south Cantiaci. I think the north Cantiaci may have been suspect and the Durotriges very suspect (to keep Postumus pinned down).
I think Suetonius can rely on the tribes north of the Thames being hostile, as well as all the tribes of the west (Wales, Cornwall). However, these were probably not allies with the Iceni, so no coordinated attack.
I suspect the Brigantes were hostile to Rome, but there is little evidence of the Corieltauvi being hostile.
As a result, I think Suetonius has even more problems than I first suggested. He cannot afford the Iceni to bring in the North Cantiaci into the revolt, so he first has to deal with the N.Cantiaci to secure the south of Britain.
Likewise, he cannot afford to lose the SW ... so he needs Postumus to stay in the SW to secure his western flank. I would suggest Postumus needs to be controlling the area right up to Gloucester and even into the lower Severn valley.
Having secured his left and right flanks, Suetonius is then able to move to either Silchester, from which he can launch an offensive moving up the Chilterns towards Norfolk, or alternatively, Suetonius would camp south of the Thames, in preparation for a forced crossing of the Thames ...but I think, given his inferiority in numbers, he cannot afford to waste lots of troops on a forced crossing. In his situation, that it is not going to be something he can do. He wants an unopposed crossing of the Thames, so a part of the Thames with plenty of crossing to choose from which he can only get upstream of Goring. Moreover, he wants easy supply lines, so he wants to control the crossing and Dorchester would give that control.
As he moves NE along the base of the Chilterns, the Iceni in St.Albans risk being caught between Suetonius and the Thames "moat". They either have to fight or retreat. This encircling movement may be what provoked the battle.
With a lot of diplomacy and Roman gold to keep the luke warm supporters on side, and with auxiliaries from the Belgae, I think Suetonius could have a strong position. Boudica's army, forced out of St.Albans is then forced to assemble somewhere North to North east ... perhaps near Letchworth ... a long way from the Iceni capital. Suetonius sits near Aylesbury, perhaps two days march from his seat of war at Silchester. When the Boudica hoard finally advances, Suetonius moves to his preferred valley on the Chilterns to take his stance and await Boudica.
Oh the grand oh Duke Suetonius, he had a Roman legion, he galloped rushed down to (a minor settlement called) Londinium then he galloped rushed back again. Londinium Bridge is falling down, falling down ... HOLD IT ... change of plans, we're leaving the bridge for Boudica and galloping rushing north.
