Boudicca the Revolt

But despite the obvious Roman agenda that has been intertwined within the recounts of Tacitus and Dio, they remain to be the only credible primary sources of information and provide the most accurate reports of the revolt’s eruption, core and aftermath. Differences and contradictions exist in both accounts of the revolt, with Tacitus harbouring a more lenient attitude towards the British in his collections, ‘Agricola’ and the ‘Annals’. Tacitus suggests that the underlying cause of the revolt was the mistreatment of the Iceni tribe by the Romans following Prasutagus’ death. Tacitus writes in Agricola, ‘the Britons dwelt much amongst themselves on the miseries of subjection†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ introducing the idea that the native’s rights had been suppressed and that the revolt was partly at the fault of the Roman government. Tacitus, in the Annals, proposes that frustration and resentment grew within the Iceni after the Romans ignored Prasutagus’ will to share the rulership of the tribe between the emperor and his two daughters. Instead, Roman officers and slaves alike attacked his kingdom, publicly flogging his wife, Boudicca, and raping his two daughters. Outrage ensued within the humiliated tribe, subsequently leading to the rise of the revolt. Tacitus’ account of the events that led to the revolt display a soft tone of sympathy towards the natives, whilst also openly criticizing and condemning the treatment the Iceni received; thereby providing the most objective viewpoint of the revolt’s roots. On the other hand, Cassius Dio submits other reasons behind the eruption of Boudicca’s revolt in ‘Dio’s Roman History’. Dio introduces the idea that the Iceni were searching for an ‘excuse’ to strengthen the notion that the Romans were tyrants in order to ignite the rebellion and overthrow the invasion, ‘an excuse for the war was found in the confiscation of sums of money that Claudius had given to the foremost Britons. ’ Dio proceeds to propose another possible cause, focusing on the money that Seneca, hoping to garner profit from interest, lent the natives and later demanded back through harsh strategies. However, Dio concludes that ‘the person who was chiefly instrumental in rousing the natives and persuading them to fight†¦ was Boudicca. Dio’s approach to the revolt presents the British tribes as greedy; killing seventy thousand people for the sake of the money that was taken from them. Cassius Dio projects biasness towards Rome in his work, hence the title of his historical collection ‘Dio’s Roman History’. This is especially clear when Dio, in his collection, chooses to overlook the growing frustration amongst the native tribes that was caused by the aggression of the Romans, as suggested by Tacitus and other minority sources. Manda Scott, British author of the ‘Boudicca’ series, agrees that the financial conflicts between the native tribes and Rome were essential to the breakout of the war; however, she insists that the conflicts were because of Roman greed for money, opposing Dio’s insistence on presenting the blame upon the British natives. Tacitus and Dio’s accounts of the revolt bring forth different perspectives in regards to the causes. Yet, both historians have recorded similar information in regards to the events and the aftermath. In Tacitus’ ‘The Annals’, Boudicca’s army destroyed Camulodunum and burnt down the Temple of Claudius – referred to as ‘Citadel of Tyranny’ by Paul Sealey a major symbolic victory for the Trinovantes, whose land was seized for the construction of the temple. The large army then advanced to Londinium, where Suetonius was awaiting them. However, upon contemplation, Suetonius decided to abandon Londinium to its fate on the basis of his army’s numerical inferiority, a decision that was morally criticized by Tacitus, ‘unmoved by lamentations and appeals, Suetonius gave the signal for departure. Tacitus portrays the rebels as barbaric during their campaign, recounting that they ‘could not wait to cut throats, hang, burn and crucify. ’ Similarly, Dio, in ‘Roman History VIII’ also depicts the Britons as savages by describing in detail their methods of torture, ‘They hung up naked the noblest women an d then cut off their breasts†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ After the rebels ravaged Londinium and Verulamium, in an unknown location, Suetonius gathered his army of 10,000 men. Suetonius positioned his men in a position that gave the British the impression that they were trapped, giving the Romans the advantage of deceiving their opponents before an ambush attack. As Boudicca’s army of, according to Dio, 230,000 men encountered the experienced Roman soldiers, Dio writes that Suetonius ‘could not extend his line the whole length of hers†¦ so inferior they were in numbers. ’ For this reason, the army was divided into three bodies, to which Suetonius delivered three speeches of encouragement and comfort, saying, ‘Up, Romans! Show these accursed wretches how far we surpass them†¦ Fear not. Meanwhile, Boudicca also delivered a speech to her army that further fueled their rage, ‘†¦old people are killed, virgins are raped†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ whilst also giving them confidence to fight, ‘they will never face the din and roar of all our thousands’, before ordering them to charge. As the large army charged toward s the Romans, Tacitus writes that Suetonius signaled his men to throw their javelins at the approaching mass. John Nayler, historical consultant, explainss Suetonius’ strategy as to move as one shielded body, so as to act as a defense, whilst those at the front used their short swords to kill attackers. Meanwhile, Tacitus’ account, ‘then, in wedge formation, they burst forward’, supports this theory. As the battle begun and their forces clashed, Dio’s account suggests that the battle was initially even between both sides as the ‘heavy-armed were opposed to the heavy-armed, cavalry crashed with cavalry†¦the barbarians would assail the Romans with a rush of their chariots. ’ However, as events unfolded, order was lost and chaos unfolded, ‘horsemen would overthrow foot-soldier and foot-soldier strike down horseman. Neither Tacitus nor Dio provide further detail other than that the battle continued ‘for a long time’ but ‘finally, late in the day, the Romans prevailed. ’ As many as eighty thousand Britons fell according to Tacitus, but as for the Roman casualties, both historians deliberately give the illusion that the Romans were not massacred in order to maintain the reputation of their victory. There exist co ntradictions between Tacitus and Dio in regards to Boudicca’s fate, with Tacitus claiming that she poisoned herself whilst Dio writes that he died of illness. Manda Scott supports Tacitus’ account, suggesting that this would be the most plausible explanation considering the grief that Boudicca would have experienced after the mass slaughter of her people as well as the loss of her two daughters. Along with the Britons’ defeat and the loss of their leader, they had also suffered from famine due to neglecting their crops that year. As for the aftermath of the revolt within Rome, Tacitus recounts that Suetonius prolonged the war through punitive operations, gaining criticism from Classicianus. These criticisms, in turn, were received by Rome, who had interests to stop the war immediately so as to save resources and lives. Therefore, Nero sent his freedman, Polyclitus, to assess the situation in Britain, resulting in the replacement of Suetonius by Turpilianus in the hopes of improving relations with the natives. To conclude, Boudicca’s revolt, though ending in a military failure, was a spectacular failure that displayed to the Romans the strength and determination of a race that they had seen as inferior. Due to this revolt, which comprised of inexperienced tribesmen and women, the dynamics of the Roman government in Britain had shifted as Nero realized the core importance of maintaining good relations with the tribes. Both Tacitus and Dio have played major roles in retelling the story of Boudicca and the legacy of her political revolution, providing essential information and details that have helped modern historians to study and observe Boudicca and all the events that surrounded her. s

The Impact Of Economic Globalization And The Rise Of The MNCs On The Essay

The Impact Of Economic Globalization And The Rise Of The MNCs On The Developing World - Essay Example This report stresses that the phenomenon of globalization not only includes rise of global trade, internationalism of economic markets, development of advanced information and communication technologies, increased number of MNCs, increased mobility of people, capital, goods, ideas, and data but also pollution, infections, and diseases. On a precise note, the United Nations has defined economic globalization as the process that facilitates the increasing independence of global economies in consequence of the expanding scale of cross-border trade of services and commodities, rapid and wide spread of advanced technologies, and increased flow of international capital. The rapid advancement of science and technologies and the growing marketization are the two primary triggering forces for economic globalization. This paper makes a conclusion that the increased number of migrants is fuelling economic and social burden on destination countries but it is providing a growing source of foreign exchange for the origin countries. The temporary migration of low-skilled workers has offered positive effects for less developed countries, especially in terms of brain circulation, skills upgrading, and remittances. Remittance plays a crucial role as a source of comparably stable foreign funding. It is reported that remittances to developing states went well above $166 billion in 2005. Many less industrialized countries, like Bangladesh, Lesotho, Cambodia, Nepal, Yemen, and Sudan have become heavily dependent on remittances as a major source of foreign exchange.

Jesus Christ-Life and Influence Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Jesus Christ-Life and Influence - Research Paper Example Jesus is unanimously regarded as the one and the only virgin birth that has appeared in the entire history of mankind since the creation of Adam and Eve in the paradise. The Old Testament had already made a prediction about his arrival in the world through the virgin delivery to be made by a pious and chaste noble lady i.e. Holy Virgin Mary (Isaiah, 7:14). Thus, the pious and religious-minded Jews were well aware regarding this exceptional kind of birth in their tribe one day in the wake of the Commandments to be made by the Lord in order to show the pagans, non-believers, and hypocrites the signs of the Omnipotence of the Lord. Since all the tribes having faith in Almighty God were in wait of such a sacred birth, the Magi also travelled wide from the ancient Persia to the city of Nazareth in order to see the blessed child arrived in the world from the high heavens in order to fill the world with the dazzling sacred light of justice, equality, righteousness, and faith. The Gospel of Matthew provides a detailed and comprehensive account of the visit of the three Magi from the distant region of Persia (Matthew, 2:2). Since the Magi had been blessed with the knowledge of astrology, and their association with the Zoroastrians had increased their faith in the Oneness of Almighty God the Creator, the three Magi set out to an exhaustive expedition towards Nazareth in order to see the holy child and present their gifts to the Savior of humanity. Consequently, the child would certainly be unique and extraordinary one, which would spend his entire life in teaching, preaching and helping the people without discrimination, and would embrace death at the prime of his youth just for saving the humanity from becoming a victim of the punishment and agony for committing the original sin. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, and the Magi also met him there (Anderson, 2005: 23-24). However, because of the opposition made by the hypocrites and non-believers, Holy Mary had to proceed to Eg ypt in order to save the sacred child from the hatred of the envious and resentful people of Nazareth. Little is known about the childhood and early youth of the Holy Christ, though the historians and theologians appear to be agreeing with the notion that the signs of the spiritual elevation of this sacred child had started appearing in his personality since the childhood years (Littleton, 1975: 22). Somehow, Jesus returned to his native city along with his sacred mother in his early youth, where he was baptized by Holy John the Baptist (Matthew, 3:13-16), though John is noticed to be declaring Jesus superior to him in all respects. Hence, it becomes evident that his contemporary righteous men of Nazareth had maintained the knowledge of the spiritual and elevated status of Jesus Christ. The Christian faith is attributed to Christ, who preached love and kindness to all mankind.