Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Role of culture in social behavior
Role of culture in social behavior
Culture and human behavior
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Boudicca’s uprising was ultimately futile and it did very little in the way of revolutionising policies in Roman Britain. However, the short term effects of Boudicca’s revolt did change the ways in which the Romans governed the Britons, despite the loss (British National Party, 2011). According to the Biographer Suetonius, it was clear to the Romans that Boudicca’s uprising highlighted the threats to their ability to subdue all of Britain (Mattingly, 2007), and their military honour and confidence suffered due to the death toll of the Romans reaching into the thousands. As a result on this, they increased their military power as a precaution (Mattingly, 2007). As Tacitus stated in the Annals, ‘It was a glorious victory….the whole army was now …show more content…
The quality and detail of these accounts themselves are quite variable and Boudicca remains a mysterious figure and, in fact, virtually nothing concrete is known about her. Boudicca’s legacy is that she was a great heroine of the British Empire, who united the people against the forces of Rome and fought for their freedom. There is evidence, however that suggests that she was anything but. It is important to examine what is known about the woman herself, when examining her legend, as the mystery that surrounds her stems from the fact that there are only two primary sources. Boudicca is depicted in the most savage of terms by Cassius Dio: "She was huge of frame, terrifying of aspect, and with a harsh voice. A great mass of bright red hair fell to her knees: She wore a great twisted golden necklace, and a tunic of many colours, over which was a thick mantle, fastened by a brooch. Now she grasped a spear, to strike fear into all who watched her...…” (Dio’s Roman History). The quote, while appearing to describe Boudicca, could possibly have been exaggerating her appearance for the purpose of dramatic colouring, or even simply describing the typical Celtic warrior woman. Another possibility is that Dio simply exaggerated her appearance so as to minimise the embarrassment of the Romans having been defeated by a woman. As has been discussed, in contemporary sources, Boudicca is often described as a great heroine of the British Empire. However, the evidence suggests that she was absolutely brutal, punishment being non-exclusive. When the army razed the cities to the ground, they left no survivors, not even women and children (Brondou, 2011). Evidence found at an archaeology dig in Colchester supports this accusation that the brutality of the army was undeniable. Jason Burke, writing for
Military Weakness is also another reason for Rome’s fall because the army is what makes sure that the empire is safe. Document B states that the
The hypothesis of this report is that the military reforms instituted by Gaius Marius ultimately paved the way for the fall of the Roman Republic.
History is divided on whether Boudica a scorned woman or did she have a justified reason for her retaliation. The book, Real Lives Boudica the story of the Fearless Icini Queen, by Gaby Halberstam, published by A&C Black in London, is a story told by Boudica herself. She is known for taking down over 70,000 Roman men and women due to the pain that they inflicted on her and her people. The book is written in the first person about the historical events that unfolded in Boudica’s life in a fictional story. This book does an amazing job at making the reader feel as if they were Boudica and an idea of what her personality would have been. Halberstam was able to give details through research and filling in the blanks. There are many famous men and women from our history that we would like to have a personal conversation with and this book is almost like sitting across from Boudica, listening to her tell her story.
These changes could be felt long after the death of the Gracchi, which is evident in the powerful political armies of Marius and Sulla. In conclusion, The Gracchi were significant figures in Roman history for the short and long term consequences that resulted from their actions, acting as perceptive idealistic men who were concerned for the greater good of Rome at a time when it was atypical to do so. Works Cited:.. Bradley, Pamela. Ancient Rome. 1999
The book Fires of Jubilee: Nat Turner’s Fierce Rebellion (New York, Ny: Harper Perennial, 1990) by Stephen B. Oates portrays a slave rebellion and uprising in the 1830’s. Oates has written many books on American history and his style of writing makes his books readable and popular. He has become a unique storyteller of his time, in his book he tells of a transformation that changed the city of South Hampton, Virginia forever, an unspeakable action heard throughout the whole nation and insurrection. What is an insurrection? It is a rebellion, revolution, mutiny and uprising, a concept that has never lost hope in African-American slaves.
Some would say The Fredonian Rebellion was the start of the Texas Revolution. It was the first attempt by colonists in Texas to secede from Mexico and while it lasted no longer than a month, it would foreshadow Texan revolt in the years to come.
The northern areas of America may have been known as a retreat for free slaves; however, in early and mid 18th century slaves received treatment which could be compared to those enslaved in the southern regions of America.
Brutus was not a very good military leader. His action when his army first arrived in
Felix Brutus On mony bonkkes ful Where were and wrake and wonder Bi syez hatz wont erinne, And oft boe blysse and blunder Ful skete hatz skyfted synne. (1-19) After the siege and the assault had ceased at Troy, the city battered and burnt to coals and ashes, the fellow that there wrought the machinations of treason was tried for his treachery, the foulest on earth: It was Aeneas the noble, and his noble kin, who then subjugated provinces, and became masters of well-nigh all the wealth in Western Europe. Then noble Romulus directs himself hurriedly to Rome. With great arrogance he builds that city in that place, and gives it his own name, as it is now called; (likewise) Ticius (travels) to Tuscany and founds dwellings, Longbeard lifts up homes in Lombardy, and far over the French Flood [i.e., the English Channel] Felix Brutus with joy on many broad banks plants Britain, where war and vengeance and wonder have existed in alternation therein, and often both bliss and blunder have very often alternated since. )
The aims of Boccaccio in his original 1370 version of 'Lisabetta' are far different from those of Keats who wrote 'Isabella' 500 years later. Keats has carefully analysed the original story, and selected various aspects that he thinks are important to develop into his 63-stanza poem, and has also omitted information that he sees as not important and not relevant to the core plot. The foremost topic that Keats' elaborates is the love affair between Lorenzo and Isabella. He tries to evoke many more emotions from the reader than Boccaccio does, as he believes that this is an important aspect of the story that needs to be developed. In Boccaccios story, the love between the two grows rapidly - almost instantly.
Events which stretch as far back as the reforms of the Gracchi brothers’ meant that the Rome was facing a Republic that was already deteriorating before Pompey had stepped into power. While Pompey’s quest for power was harmful, many other factors were also baleful to the Republic, and were hence instrumental in its decline. Gnaeus Pompeius’s measures to gain power were harmful because it was primarily a paradox to the principles of being part of a Republic with all its notions of shared and short power. The fundamental reason why there were other reasons for the decline of the system are that the military power was given to him, the already weak Senate, and the fact that Pompey was not the only player in the breakdown of the Republic due to the alliances he had made with Crassus and Caesar.
By nature, the crowd of Romans will be more concerned with their personal safety than the death of their ruler. Antony appeals to his personal experiences and friendship with Caesar in a touching, personal, primarily pathetic argument; on the other hand, Brutus appeals to the Roman citizens directly by presenting himself as their protector against Caesar, a threat to their safety and liberty. Therefore, in terms of effectiveness, Brutus reaches his audience on a much more personal and convincing level with his argument than Antony was able to with his account of his friendship and life with
The lack of war allowed the Roman Republic to stagnate and become self-indulgent. By the end of the Punic Wars, which combined these elements, Rome was sure to fail. Without a common thread uniting its society, the Roman Republic unraveled because it had nothing left holding it together. Works Cited (Plutarch, p. 269), (Holland, p. 14), (Plutarch, p. 319), (Holland, p. 33)
After the conclusion of the Gauls sacking Rome, Rome became obsessed with the security of their empire and acutely aware of any and all potential threats. “Following the sack by the Gauls, the Romans were frightened by strong neighbors and sometimes made preemptive strikes against peoples they believed were becoming too powerful” (Kidner, 129). Rome became a walled city that would not let any foreign soldiers through its gates from the conclusion of the sacking in 390 B.C. until 410 A.D., earning it the nickname of the Eternal City. The Roman mantra of Lex Fetiale, which prohibited Rome from going to war unless under siege or asked for assistance, was suddenly much easier to justify than before.
Brutus’ leadership and compassion for others make him a popular figure amongst the Roman people, and it is his reputation that establishes him as an influential individual. For example, despite the fact that Brutus loves Caesar like a brother, he warily joins the conspiracy to assassinate him. He does this because he believes that Caesar’s ambition would become tyranny and that Caesar’s death is a necessary evil in order to preserve the liberties of the Roman people. In his own words Brutus claims, “It must be by his death; and for my part, I know no personal cause to spurn at him, but for the general.”(Act 2, Scene 1, Page 1116). In addition, Brutus takes the reins of authority from Cassius and becomes the leader of the conspiracy. He gains this prerogative because of his convincing tongue and powerful influence. His leadership is evidenced when he begins to challenge Cassius’ ideas. When Cassius asks the conspirators to “swear our resolution”(Act 2...