Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

MANCETTER - A FORT OR A BATTLEFIELD or BOTH?

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by TheodericAur (U14260004) on Tuesday, 15th November 2011

  Hi All
  
  As I have been recently told many experts beleive that Boudica was finally beaten at Mancetter.
  
  Can anyone give a reason why this particular site has been agreed upon apart from the crescent shaped geography which might have a resemblance to Tacitus description to the battlefield?
  
  Kind Regards - TA

  Link to this forum: MANCETTER - A FORT OR A BATTLEFIELD or BOTH?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Herewordless (U14549396) on Tuesday, 15th November 2011

  Hi Theo
  
  I struggled to locate my previous post about Mancetter in the midlands, but from memory, I think that digs at Manduessedum dated the 20-odd acre Roman fort activity there to between 43-61ad?
  
  The site straddles the meeting point of two military roads, the Fosse Way (Exeter to Lincoln) and Watling Street (Richborough-London-Wroxeter) and the region is the site of many theorists who say that Boudica's last battle was fought on land nearby, which suits the description of Tacitus.
  
  I know you struggle with the idea that Paulinus headed North-West back up Watling Street (laden with civilian refugees) after abandoning London to an advancing Boudica (then moving south from sacking Colchester), and believe that Paulinus headed WEST instead,for fear of being ambushed by forward units of the rebel army, but maybe they weren't that far west across the country as he 'snook' up Watling to meet his advancing army (the XIV & part-XXth fast-marching down from sacking Anglesey?) with constant streams of intelligence from his wide cavalry screen?

  Link to this forum: MANCETTER - A FORT OR A BATTLEFIELD or BOTH?

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by TheodericAur (U14260004) on Tuesday, 22nd November 2011

  Hi Hereword
  
  I am afraid that you are right.......
  
  Graham Webster's book Boudica is excellent but his timings are all wrong.
  
  The idea that a force of cavalry could travel at 60miles a day is far too much (the horses would have collapsed over about 35 miles a day maximum) whereas the army could march at 25 miles per day if needed but typically would have been twenty.
  
  Messengers could ride at 60 miles per day but they would have been very fit and had a change of horses frequently.
  
  If Seutonius Paulinus did take refugees they would have been the ones who could travel but who had not managed to leave for one reason or another. These people (even by Roman accounts) were begging to be taken.
  
  The ones who were fit or rich and had transport would have already gone unless they were staying to fight.
  
  So Seutonius would have been slowed down and as much as he hated barbarians he had a duty to protect Roman citizens.
  
  Webster actually mentions that the obvious way for the refugees to go would have been West to Bosham and then for some strange reason ignores that option.
  
  Again the Mancetter option looks good until you realise that the valley (ampitheatre with a large entrance really) is not deep enough to accommodate the Roman Army and even 10,000 of the enemy.
  
  Now either Tacitus is way out in his estimation in numbers and there were far fewer Brythons or the valley just is not big enough (after all 80,000 were supposed to heve been killed).
  
  The width of the entrance to the valley is around 1300 yards, giving a maximum of 1500 soldiers in a line.
  
  The Brythons would have overlapped the Roman Line by 1 mile each side and would have been 22 lines deep if they were only manned by the 80,000. Of course if this was 40,000 they would still have been enveloped. If it was 230,000 they would have been swallowed up.
  
  Even if they burst out in a wedge or series of wedges they would have been surrounded, and even if the Brythons all ran away the plain is so large and flat that tens of thousands would have escaped even with the waggons at the "edge of the plain" which is huge.
  
  For the destruction to have worked in the Roman's favour there had to be restrictive areas all aroud the battle site and in this case this is a huge wide open and flat plain.
  
  The Fort is useful there but only has links to Watling Street and the road from Leicester, the link to the Fosse Way is ten miles away at "High Cross".
  
  I remain to be convinced that this is where Boudica met her doom.....
  
  Kind Regards - TA
  
  
  
  

  Link to this forum: MANCETTER - A FORT OR A BATTLEFIELD or BOTH?

  Report message3

Back to top