BOUDICA UPDATE

Archaeology evolves at breakneck speed these days. So I may have been playing catch-up, but I have only just finished reading two books which shed new light on the Boudican revolt - Later Iron Age Norfolk, by Natasha Hutcheson (BAR British Series 361, 2004), and The Roman Invasion of Britain, by Birgitta Hoffman (Pen & Sword, 2013). If the subject intrigues, both are important reads.
Natasha Hutcheson studied Late Iron Age metalwork from Norfolk and reached some fascinating conclusions. For example, she queries the usual assumption that, post-rebellion, the Legions moved into Iceni territory with retribution foremost in mind. Where is the evidence, she asks? So perhaps most of the anti-Roman elements were already dead, or most of the Iceni territory was already pro-Roman. Were there, in fact, more people against Boudica than in favour of her?
The landscape was embued with meaning, and from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD, and beyond, ritual/votive activity seems to have taken place. Fring may indicate a practice of depositing metalwork and coins in the landscape rather than reflect the burial of wealth in response to presumed threats.
Also, it seems that Late Iron Age society was not wiped out, because the material record suggests a continuing industry producing items, particularly horse equipment. Indeed, the production of native-style artefacts seems to have continued into the early Roman period, while the tradition of hoarding continued into the 2nd century AD and beyond. Perhaps Iron Age chariots were roaming the Norfolk countryside long after AD 60/61.
In a further blow to the traditional story, LIA society may have moved away from an 'old' material language based on torcs and gold to a new language expressed in coinage and horse equipment. In which case (Natasha suggests) it is unlikely that Boudica actually wore a torc. Torcs may have related to an earlier society, and by the AD 60s may have been familiar only in folklore.
Norfolk appears to have been richer than other parts of the country in metalwork and coins, and later concentrations of horse equipment indicate an ability to acquire wealth, potentially through agricultural and political links with the Roman world.
Birgitta Hoffman's book compares written sources with the archaeology, and she agrees there is little sign of post-battle destruction in the Iceni heartland, or for that matter at St Albans (Verulamium). There is destruction, however, at Putney, Brentford, Staines and Silchester.
By the time of the Claudian conquest the Iceni had merged into a single tribe, of which the most powerful lived in western Breckland. And there are now five suspected oppida (proto-towns), at Sedgeford (spread over eight square miles), Caistor St Edmund, Stonea/Chatteris, Thetford, and Saham Toney/Ashill, along with other smaller sites and forts.
Further, she points out that Boudica was not mentioned by Roman writers prior to the rebellion; Silchester may have rivalled Colchester and London in size; the counter-attack by elements of the 9th Legion may have happened at Colchester; while the site of the final battle could have been at Mancetter, High Cross, Staines or Silchester.
A postscript is that client treaties with Rome had to be renegotiated afresh with every change of ruler, and that only three client-rulers are known - Prasutagus, Cartimandua of the Brigantes, and Cogidubnus (Chichester/Fishbourne), who is referred to as the 'great king of the Britons.'