What if Boudicca had defeated the Romans (Britain, invaded, viking)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If Boudicca had defeated the Romans, would Britain have remained a strong and united island and would this new Britain have seen off the Saxons and Vikings, years later?
I am not trying to hijack the thread, but it would not have been possible. At Watling Street 10,000 Romans defeated an army of Brtions sometimes numbered at over 230,000 and in reality at least 70,000. The differance in traning, tactics and equiptment is incalulable.
And the Roman were ruthless. They would, as Tacitus noted, "make a desert and call it peace." Imagine Viet Nam if the US had no problem killing every man, woman and child in the nation. Britain would have ceased to exist.
For more on Roman ruthlessness, read THE JEWISH WAR.
If Boudicca had United all the tribes, especially the Brigantes I think she would have beaten Paulinus, especially since their treck from North Wales, Roman propaganda has the British loss at a ridiculous amount but who was present? Not doubting that Boudicca was a nasty piece of work she had Nero worried. Only the Cantiaci wanted protection but Britain wanted to be left alone a British characteristic . I need imaginative replies as to how they would have handled future aggression
If Boudicca had defeated the Roman would Britain have remained a strong and united island and would this new Britain have seen off the Saxons and Vikings, years later?
The Romans were not the kind of people who lost and gave up, and at the time Boudicca lead the rebellion Rome was hundreds of years from its fall.
A successful revolt would have lead to a second invasion with no quater given.
Rome wasn't invincible, it's possible a disaster in Britain would've caused the Romans to say "to Hell with it" as they did with Germany and Mesopotamia.
The Romans were not the kind of people who lost and gave up, and at the time Boudicca lead the rebellion Rome was hundreds of years from its fall.
A successful revolt would have lead to a second invasion with no quater given.
I disagree. The Battles of Carrhae and Teutoburg Wald, years before Boudicca, were massive defeats for the Romans. As in these defeats, Rome could have just "called it quits" and left Britain alone if Boudicca had won.
However, in the end, it is probably correct that a Roman defeat and expulsion from Britain would have doomed Britain to invasions by the Saxons, Jutes, and Angles as well as the later Vikings.
Last edited by MyTarge13; 10-04-2015 at 03:52 AM..
Reason: typo
However, in the end, it is probably correct that a Roman defeat and expulsion from Britain would have doomed Britain to invasions by the Saxons, Jutes, and Angles as well as the later Vikings.
Shouldn't there be a eye-roll smiley after that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What if Boudicca had defeated the Romans
after that?
