Talk:Battle of Watling Street

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: `<!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. -->` `\|B-Class-1=yes/no` `<!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. -->` `\|B-Class-2=yes/no` `<!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. -->` `\|B-Class-3=yes/no` `<!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->` `\|B-Class-4=yes/no` `<!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->` `\|B-Class-5=yes/no`
Related task forces (periods and conflicts):
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC–c. 500 AD)

I've proposed this article for deletion on two grounds. One, it duplicates the entry on Boudicca, and two, although the identification of the battle site as Watling Street seems likely, it's conjecture. I've never heard Boudicca's last stand refered to as the "Battle of Watling Street" before, so I can't imagine anyone looking for information on it would look it up under that title. If there's a good reason keeping this entry and not, say, expanding the report of the battle under Boudicca, please go to the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Battle of Watling Street page and have your say. --Nicknack009 08:54, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

1 VFD
2 Is the account of the battle historical?
3 Watling Street?
4 "An army that size would starve"

[edit] VFD

On 1 April 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Battle of Watling Street for a record of the discussion. – AB CD 01:50, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In that case, I've re-written it somewhat. I've cut down the background to bare essentials and corrected some errors of fact. --Nicknack009 10:00, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It is assumed that the estimate of 1/3 of a million is possibly exaggerated. History Channel says it was most likely closer between 60,000-300,000.

[edit] Is the account of the battle historical?

The size of Boadicea's forces is mentioned to have been between 200 000-400 000 in the article. Is this possible? Above it is claimed that History Channel has stated the army was around 60 000-300 000.

Can the larger figures be correct? 10 000 Romans defeating an army of 400 000 seems hard to believe, even when you take into account the differences in equipment, training and other factors. If Boadiceas casualties were 150 000, this means that every Roman soldier on average killed 15 people that day - suffering only 400 casualties. Given that most of the combat was hand-to-hand, how can this be?

Could it be possible that the Roman sources (Tacitus etc) cited in this article are exaggerating the size of the opposing force and its losses? What is the consensus of researchers on the subject? Have any other accounts of the battle, in addition to the Roman ones, been preserved?

Now that I decided to write about this subject, could someone else also clarify the following. The beginning of the article states:

Traveling north along Watling Street with Boudica and her army close behind, Paulinus chose an open field along the road surrounded by forest on three sides. The forest provided protection for the Roman flanks and rear against attack.

How do you protect your flanks with a forest? What prevented an army of tens or hundreds of thousands from sending detachments through the forests and effectively encircle the Romans? One can surely walk through a wood - and Boadicea's army was hardly the kind of army that fought in a carefully co-ordinated formation.

You're quite right about the numbers. The Roman reports may well be exaggerated, but they're less than the numbers that were given here. Tacitus numbers the rebels at 100,000 at one point, as says that "according to one report" (suggesting he wasn't certain) almost 80,000 Britons and only 400 Romans fell. Dio Cassius says that, by the time of the final battle the Britons numbered 230,000. As far as the battlefield is concerned, Tacitus says that Suetonius took his stand "approached by a narrow defile [a narrow passage or gorge - Webster], closed in at the rear by a forest". The sides of the defile would protect the flanks and make it much difficult to approach from the rear, and the wood would be a further impediment had they managed to get that far. The point of choosing such a field was to narrow the front line, so Boudica couldn't present any more more men than the Romans could fight at any one time. I've fixed both points in the article. --Nicknack009 16:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Correcting myself - I can't find any reference to the numbers of the rebels in Tacitus, so I've removed that. --Nicknack009 16:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, re the number of Britons killed, after the battle broke the Romans went on the rampage against the women and children at the back of the field, as well as the combatants, which would have pushed the casualty numbers up. Nicknack009 16:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

An anonymous vandal seems determined to change the numbers. I have therefore requested semi-protection for this page. --Nicknack009 22:10, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Watling Street?

The title of this article doesn't make any sense, nor do the claims in the text that it happened around a place called Watling Street. Does anyone know more background here??--Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 03:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I read a couple of the references and I think this article should be retitled, although to what I do not know.--Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 03:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)