03-16-2010, 08:56 PM
I'm back again! And yes delivering supplies could have convinced the Visigoths to flee, but they likely would have needed quite a bit of persuading in order to want to do so. From what the Bishop wrote
"At midday, and right across the middle of the plain, you brought your little company of eighteen 2 safe through some thousands of the Goths, a feat which |68 posterity will surely deem incredible. [4] At the sight of you, nay, at the very rumour of your name, those seasoned troops were smitten with stupefaction; their captains were so amazed that they never stopped to note how great their own numbers were and yours how small. They drew off their whole force to the brow of a steep hill; they had been besiegers before, but when you appeared they dared not even deploy for action. You cut down some of their bravest, whom gallantry alone had led to defend the rear."
it seems that the Visigoths were startled by Ecdicius' sudden and safe appearance, and upon knowing that he was son of the Emperor and Magister Militum they retreated for fear that the Imperial army was behind him. Their rearguard, who held the seige in case it was a trick, seem to have been cut down so swiftly and with so much violence that the Visigoths were persuaded to retreat even though Ecdicius' men were covered in injuries -indicated by a later passage- "or measuring with trembling fingers the holes made in cuirasses by cut or thrust..." they fled from this tiny band of heroic horsemen. Also Kolba it makes sense that in your book Ecdicius would be confused with Riothamos because Sidonius Apollinaris also wrote a lettter to him :lol: I am sure we can respect Ecdicius for being the last truely heroic glimmer of Roman glory (Unless you count Ambrosius) a mere five years before the fall of the empire.
A rather interesting point which I was trying to get at is that there were likely 200 men in that rearguard, meaning that each man had to have killed ten men and severly injured another who was finnished off by a second member of their band.
hock: If Sub-Roman cavalry was as well-led and as powerful as that, then it is plausible that Ambrosius won all his battles with no one but his personal band of cavalry. Take into account that the britons prefered to fight at dawn and at fords, then you have one deadly fighting force, even if it was just 100 men.
"At midday, and right across the middle of the plain, you brought your little company of eighteen 2 safe through some thousands of the Goths, a feat which |68 posterity will surely deem incredible. [4] At the sight of you, nay, at the very rumour of your name, those seasoned troops were smitten with stupefaction; their captains were so amazed that they never stopped to note how great their own numbers were and yours how small. They drew off their whole force to the brow of a steep hill; they had been besiegers before, but when you appeared they dared not even deploy for action. You cut down some of their bravest, whom gallantry alone had led to defend the rear."
it seems that the Visigoths were startled by Ecdicius' sudden and safe appearance, and upon knowing that he was son of the Emperor and Magister Militum they retreated for fear that the Imperial army was behind him. Their rearguard, who held the seige in case it was a trick, seem to have been cut down so swiftly and with so much violence that the Visigoths were persuaded to retreat even though Ecdicius' men were covered in injuries -indicated by a later passage- "or measuring with trembling fingers the holes made in cuirasses by cut or thrust..." they fled from this tiny band of heroic horsemen. Also Kolba it makes sense that in your book Ecdicius would be confused with Riothamos because Sidonius Apollinaris also wrote a lettter to him :lol: I am sure we can respect Ecdicius for being the last truely heroic glimmer of Roman glory (Unless you count Ambrosius) a mere five years before the fall of the empire.
A rather interesting point which I was trying to get at is that there were likely 200 men in that rearguard, meaning that each man had to have killed ten men and severly injured another who was finnished off by a second member of their band.
hock: If Sub-Roman cavalry was as well-led and as powerful as that, then it is plausible that Ambrosius won all his battles with no one but his personal band of cavalry. Take into account that the britons prefered to fight at dawn and at fords, then you have one deadly fighting force, even if it was just 100 men.
Nicholas
