BOUDICA/BOUDICCA/BOADICEA TEXTS

 

A selection and rationale by Dr Robert Guyver

College of St Mark and St John

Plymouth

 

 


CONTENTS                                                                                                             

WHAT TEXTS ARE IN THIS PACK?                                                                             

HOW TO USE THESE TEXTS                                                                                      

HOW TO ORDER THESE TEXTS FOR YOURSELF                                                       

 

APPENDIX 1 – BOUDICA TEXTS  

FROM TACITUS ANNALS OF IMPERIAL ROME                                                         

Part 1 THE CAUSE OF THE REVOLT

Part 2 THE ATTACK ON CAMULODONUM (COLCHESTER)                  

Part 3 THE ATTACKS ON LONDON AND VERULAMIUM (ST ALBANS)

Part 4 THE FINAL BATTLE                                                                                         

 

APPENDIX 2  – BOUDICA TEXTS                                                                               

FROM DIO CASSIUS ROMAN HISTORY

Part 1 THE CAUSE OF THE REVOLT                                                                

Part 2 BOUDICA PREPARES HER ARMIES FOR WAR                                     

Part 3 THE REVOLT                                                                            

Part 4 THE FINAL BATTLE                                                                                           

 

APPENDIX  3 – BOUDICA TEXTS                                                                                 

FROM HENRIETTA MARSHALL OUR ISLAND STORY

Part 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND                                                                 

Part 2 THE ROMANS INSULT THE ICENI                                                                      

Part 3 BOADICEA’S ATTACKS ON THE CITIES                                                            

Part 4 THE FINAL BATTLE                                                                                           

 

APPENDIX 4 – BOUDICA TEXTS                                                                                  

FROM R.J. UNSTEAD PEOPLE IN HISTORY

Part 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND                                                                 

Part 2 THE ROMANS INSULT THE ICENI                                                                     

Part 3 BOADICEA’S ATTACKS ON THE TOWNS                                                         

Part 4 THE FINAL BATTLE                                                                                           

 

APPENDIX 5 – BOUDICA TEXTS                                                                                  

MICHAEL WOOD IN SEARCH OF THE DARK AGES

 

APPENDIX 6 BOUDICA QUESTIONNAIRE MARK 1 (1996/7)                                        

APPENDIX 7 – BOUDICA QUESTIONNAIRE MARK 2 (1998 – 1999)                                

APPENDIX 8 BOUDICA QUESTIONNAIRE MARK 3 (1999 – 2000)                                

APPENDIX 9ARTICLE ON ‘BOUDICCA TEXTS’  BY ROBERT GUYVER IN Teaching History (2001)

PRESENTATIONS (Figure within above article)                                                                                             

APPENDIX 10  REFLECTIONS ON BOUDICA ROLE-PLAY                                          

BY FRANK BRIDGEMAN-SUTTON (PGCE STUDENT 2001 - 2002)

Figure 1 – Picture in Marshall by A.S.Forrest                                                                 

Figure 2 – Picture in Unstead by J.C.B. Knight                                                           

Figure 3 – Picture in Unstead by J.C.B. Knight                                                          

Figure 4 – Map of Roman Britain in Wood                                                                 

Figure 5 – (Figure 3 in Teaching History article) Dio, Tacitus, Unstead and Marshall on the causes of the uprising

Figure 6 – Table of Presentations in Guyver article                                                  

Figure 7 – Table of Questions on texts in Guyver article                                            


WHAT TEXTS ARE IN THIS PACK?

Building a sophisticated substantive and syntactic knowledge base for teaching

(Substantive: content; syntactic: methodological)

A Contemporary (Roman)

Tacitus’s account is the most authentic because he had to an eye-witness, Agricola, his father-in-law. Which bits of Tacitus’s account did his father-in-law not witness?

 Dio wrote much later (c. 214 – 226), and his account, as one might expect from a politician and laywer, is full of speeches.  Did the Romans have access to any prisoners who heard Boudica’s speeches? Would there have been a language problem? 

 Do either Tacitus or Dio give an Iceni view of the issues?

 What light do they throw on the financial relationship between the Romans and the Iceni (Seneca, the loan, taxes, etc)?

B Juvenile (written for children)

These are historical stories written for children from first nearly fifty and second, a hundred years ago.

Henrietta Marshall gives a romanticised view of Boudica/Boadicea as a cult celebrity. Which sources has she read. Did Paulinus and Boudica ever meet (as she suggests). Imagine Russell Crowe as Paulinus and Nicole Kidman as Boudica in a Hollywood production!!??

Unstead is rather more factual and does appear to have read the contemporary sources.

Some teachers read only sources written for children and miss out on the contemporary and scholarly.

C Scholarly (written by a scholar, usually for adults)

Michael Wood wrote this chapter in the early 1980s for a TV production in which he went in search of the Dark Ages. He provides a sophisticated contextual frame in which many modern parallels are drawn (e.g. imperialism through aid; the First World exploiting the Third World; Third World debt – al principles well-known to the Romans). There are other writers who have written at length on Boudica. See Todd and Dudley and Webster below. Wood also knows other Roman writers and has looked at archaeological evidence. Malcolm Todd refers to another incident in the Roman Empire (reported by Tacitus in his Annals of Imperial Rome) where a rebellion (by Florus and Sacrovir in AD 21, see pp 138 – 140 in the Penguin version of the Annals, 1989) was precipitated by flooding the native population with loans etc, and calling in the loans too hastily.

HOW TO USE THESE TEXTS

The texts are each divided into four parts which broadly correspond with four parts of the story:

 background to the rebellion;

  1. attack on Colchester (Camulodonum);
  2. attack on St Albans (Verulamium) and London (Londinium);
  3. final battle and death of Boudica.

You can use these texts to improve your knowledge and understanding of the Boudican Rebellion (AD 60) in the context of the Roman invasion of AD 43 and its aftermath. You can also use the texts to study how a historian and children’s writers make a synthesis of the existing knowledge about an event from contemporary (i.e. Roman) and later archaeological sources.

You can produce a play or series of plays (straight narrative, news report; Newsnight report with comment; you can use the sources as a basis for a discussion. For other ideas see the article ‘Working with Boudicca texts – contemporary, juvenile and scholarly’ Teaching History 103 pp 32 – 35 in Teaching History (2001) (Appendix 9 from page 41).

You could try to use the texts direct with children in controlled circumstances, but it might be better to introduce the whole story first before splitting the children into groups. If they are writing plays you could encourage the children to use the reported words from the contemporary sources; if there is a choice of speeches ask them why Tacitus’s version might be preferable to Dio’s.

 Reading list

  • Cassius, D. and Cary, E. (Translator) (1927) Roman History Volume 8 (Books 61 – 70) (Loeb Classical Library Edition). Harvard, Mass: Harvard University Press. (pp. 83 – 105)
  • Dudley, D.R. and Webster, G. (1962) The Rebellion of Boudicca. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. (Available on inter-library loan from College library).
  • Farmer, A. and Ewin, A. (Eds) (Adviser, Professor David Shotter) (1992) Implementing the National Curriculum: The Romans in Britain (P2). London: The Historical Association.
  • Guyver, R.M. (2001) Boudicca Texts: scholarly, contemporary and juvenile. Teaching History. (copy provided in this booklet)
  • Tacitus (1989 originally written  c.100 AD) The Annals of Imperial Rome. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics (pages 327 - 331).
  • Tacitus, C. and Grant, M. (Translator) (1971) The Annals of Imperial Rome. London: Penguin.
  • Fraser, A. (1988) The Warrior Queens - Boadicea's Chariot. London:  A Mandarin Paperback.
  • Marshall, H. (c 1904; also published in 1922) Our Island Story. London: Nelson.
  • Snow, P. and Snow, D. (2004) Battlefield Britain. London: BBC Books.
  • Todd, M. (1999) Roman Britain (Third Edition). Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Unstead, R.J. (1957) People in History. London: A & C Black.
  • Wood, M. (1981) In Search of the Dark Ages. London: Ariel Books (for the BBC). (Text actually used in these teaching sessions)
  • Wood, M. (2001) In Search of the Dark Ages. London: BBC Books.

 Note: the picture on page 17 is by A.S.Forrest who painted the illustrations for Henrietta Marshall’s Our Island Story.                                                Robert M Guyver December 28th 2004


HOW TO ORDER THESE TEXTS FOR YOURSELF

 
1. Tacitus, C. and Grant, M. (Translator) (1971) Annals of Imperial
Rome. London: Penguin.  http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0140440607/qid=1104254158/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_10_3/026-0097319-7921244

 2. Cassius, D. and Cary, E. (Translator) (1927) Roman History Volume 8 (Books 61 – 70) (Loeb Classical Library Edition). Harvard, Mass: Harvard University Press.  http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0674991958/qid=1104254477/sr=1-28/ref=sr_1_0_28/026-0097319-7921244

 3. Marshall, H.E. (1922) Our Island Story. London: Nelson.  http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0172210240/qid=1104254882/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_8_1/026-0097319-7921244

 
4. Unstead, R.J. (1957) People in History.
London: A.&C. Black.  http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/tg/detail/offer-listing/-/071360798X/all/026-0097319-7921244

 5. Wood, M. (2001) In Search of the Dark Ages. London: BBC Books.  http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0563534311/qid=1104255345/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_3_6/026-0097319-7921244

 6. Snow, P. and Snow, D. (2004) Battlefield Britain. London: BBC Books.  http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0563487895/qid=1104255426/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_2_1/026-0097319-7921244


APPENDIX 1 – BOUDICA TEXTS – FROM TACITUS ANNALS OF IMPERIAL ROME

Edited by Robert M. Guyver for College of St Mark and St John PGCE and BEd courses 2004 - 2005

TACITUS'S ACCOUNT OF BOUDICA’S REVOLT

For information about the author look at the end of the passage

TACITUS PART ONE – THE CAUSE OF THE REVOLT

While Seutonius was thus occupied, he learnt of a sudden rebellion in the province. Prasutagus, king of the Iceni, after a life of long and renowned prosperity, had made the emperor his co-heir with his own two daughters. Prasutagus hoped by this submissiveness to preserve his kingdom and household from attack. But it turned out otherwise. Kingdom and household alike were plundered like prizes of war, the one by Roman officers, the other by Roman slaves. As a beginning, his widow Boudica was flogged and their daughters ravaged. The Icenian  chiefs were deprived of their hereditary estates as if the Romans had been given the whole country. The king’s own relatives were treated like slaves.

And the humiliated Iceni feared still worse, now that they had been reduced to provincial status. So they rebelled, and with them rose the Trinobantes (or Trinovantes) and others. Servitude had not broken them, and they had secretly plotted together to become free again.

TACITUS PART TWO – THE ATTACK ON CAMULODONUM (COLCHESTER)

They particularly hated the Roman ex-soldiers who had recently established a settlement at Camulodonum (*Colchester). The settlers drove the Trinobantes  from their homes and land, and called them prisoners and slaves. The troops encouraged the settlers’ outrages, since their own way of behaving was the same – and they looked forward to similar licence for themselves. Moreover, the temple erected to the divine Claudius (*under the present castle in Colchester) was a blatant stronghold of alien rule, and its observances were a pretext to make the natives appointed as its priests drain the whole country dry.

It seemed easy to destroy the settlement, for it had no walls (*there are Roman walls to be seen in Colchester today, but they were built after the rebellion). That was a matter which Roman commanders, thinking of amenities rather than needs, had neglected. At this juncture, for no visible reason, the statue of Victory at Camulodonum fell down – with its back turned as though it were fleeing the enemy. Delirious women chanted of destruction at hand. They cried that in the local senate-house outlandish yells had been heard; the theatre (*which can still be seen) had echoed with shrieks; at the mouth of the Thames a phantom settlement (colonia) had been seen in ruins. A blood-red colour in the sea, too, and shapes like human corpses left by the ebb-tide. These signs were interpreted hopefully by the Britons – and with terror by the veteran soldier-settlers.

As Seutonius was far away they sent for help to the procurator, Catus Decianus (a procurator dealt with the finances/taxes of a province). He sent barely two hundred men (and they were but barely equipped), although there was also a small body of troops in the town who decided to rely on the protection offered by the temple building. Secret supporters of the rebels further hampered their plans so they neither protected their town with walls and ditches nor took steps to send away the women and old folk to leave only the able-bodied men to fight. Their carelessness in neglecting the defences would only have been appropriate if there had been universal peace, so they were overwhelmed by a great barbarian host. Everything was pillaged or burnt in the first attack; only the temple in which the troops had gathered withstood a two day siege, being then taken by storm.

TACITUS PART THREE – THE ATTACKS ON LONDON AND VERULAMIUM (ST ALBANS)

The victorious Britons then turned to meet Petilius Cerialis, commander of the Ninth Legion who was hurrying to the rescue. They defeated the legion and killed the infantry to the last men. Cerialis escaped with his cavalry to the shelter of his camp’s fortification. Horrified by this disaster and his unpopularity in the province which had been pushed into war by his greed, Catus fled to Gaul. Seutonius, on the other hand, with great steadfastness, marched right through the middle of the enemy territory to London. This town, though not distinguished by the title of colonia, was still a busy centre, crowded with merchants and goods. Once there, he debated whether to choose it as his operational base but he few troops and there was a lesson to be learnt from the rashness of Petilius Cerialis. Thus, he decided to save the province as a whole at the cost of the town. The pleas and tears of the townsfolk as they begged him to help left him unmoved, but he put those able to make the journey into the column (of troops); he then gave the signal for departure. All those who were left because they were women or old or attached to the town fell into enemy hands. A similar disaster was reserved for the municipality of Verulamium (later known as  St Albans).   

TACITUS PART FOUR - THE FINAL BATTLE

As the native Britons loved plunder and hated hard work, they left the garrisons and forts alone. Instead they would head for places that offered the richest pickings and the least safety for a defending force of men. It has been established that seventy thousand Roman citizens and allies fell in the places mentioned. The enemy took neither captives nor sold captives into slavery - there was none of the commerce of war. They were eager for slaughter and the gibbet, burnings and crosses. It was as if they knew the day of reckoning would come and so took their full measure of revenge.

Seutonius already had the fourteenth legion, a detachment of the twentieth, and auxiliaries from the nearest forts, a total of ten thousand men. He decided to risk a pitched battle without further delay. He chose for himself a position approached by a narrow defile, protected at the back by woods. He made sure that an enemy could only approach from the front and that the plain gave no cover for an ambush. The legionaries were closely ranked together, with lightly armed auxiliaries on either side and the cavalry on the furthest wings. The British forces were in high spirits and their bands of foot soldiers and horsemen spread out in all directions. Their numbers were unprecedented and confidence ran so high that they brought their wives to see the victory, installing them in wagons placed around the outer edge of the plain.

Boudica, mounting her chariot with her daughters before her, rode up to clan after clan to deliver her protest:

It is customary, I know, for Britons to fight under the command of a woman and I am now avenging my destroyed land and power, my lost freedom, a beaten body and my daughters' outraged honour – not as a queen of glorious ancestors, but as a woman of her people.  Roman greed is so great that age or virginity, indeed our very bodies, are not safe from harm. Yet heaven is on our side in our cause for just and righteous revenge; one legion which fought against us has perished, and the rest are hiding in their camps or looking for a way of escape. They will never stand against the noise and clamour of our many thousands of warriors let al. one our swords and attacks. Think about this army and why we are here and know, deep in your hearts that you must conquer or die on this battlefield. Such is the determined purpose of this woman - you men can live on as slaves if you want!

Seutonius, at this critical moment, broke the silence to address his troops. Although he trusted their courage he still blended encouragement with entreaty:

Treat the noise and threats of the enemy with contempt: in the ranks opposite you can see more women than men. They are undisciplined and unarmed. When they once again face the swords and courage of their conquerors, they will remember all their earlier defeats and break immediately. A few men can decide the fate of the whole battle and it is an additional glory if  handful of troops take the credit for an entire army. Keep your ranks close. When your javelins are thrown, use your shield boss and sword and let the dead pile up. Forget all thoughts of plunder – once victory is assured, everything will be yours.                                                                                         

The battle-hardened soldiers listened eagerly and such was their enthusiasm that they immediately prepared to hurl their javelins. Seutonius, without any doubt of the outcome, gave the signal for the battle to begin.

At first the legionaries stood without moving, keeping by the defile as a natural protection. Then, as the enemy advanced they threw their javelins with deadly accuracy. They immediately dashed forward in a wedge-shaped formation. The auxiliaries charged in the same style and the cavalry, with lances extended, broke up any areas of determined resistance they encountered. The remainder took to flight but escape was difficult as the barriers of wagons blocked the escape routes. The legionaries showed no mercy to the women and the baggage animals, which were also killed, added to the pile of bodies. The outstanding glory won on that day was equal to the victories of ancient days, for, by some accounts, about eighty thousand Britons fell at a cost of four hundred Romans and a slightly larger number of wounded. Boudica ended her days by taking poison.

About the author:

Cornelius Tacitus wrote this account of Boudica’s revolt in about 100 – 110 AD. Tacitus’s father-in-law was Agricola who, as a junior officer serving under Seutonius  was in Britain at the time of Boudica’s rebellion, and even if he had not been an eyewitness to all of the events described here, was closely linked to the events. Certainly the story has the ring of a soldier’s account about it, although it was written forty to fifty years after the rebellion.


APPENDIX 2  – BOUDICA TEXTS – FROM DIO CASSIUS ROMAN HISTORY

ROMAN SOURCE written c. 214 – 226 as much as 166 years after the events

Edited by Robert M. Guyver for College of St Mark and St John PGCE and BEd courses 2004 - 2005

DIO CASSIUS: THE BOUDICAN REBELLION

For information about the author look at the last page

DIO CASSIUS PART ONE – THE CAUSE OF THE REVOLT      

.... a terrible disaster occurred in Britain. Two cities were sacked, eighty thousand of the Romans and their allies perished, and the island was lost to Rome. Moreover, all this ruin was brought upon the Romans by a woman, a fact which in itself caused them the greatest shame. Indeed, heaven gave them indications of the catastrophe beforehand. For at night there was heard to issue from the Senate House foreign language mingled with laughter, and from the theatre cries and lamentations though no mortal man uttered the words or groans; houses were seen under the water in the River Thames, and the ocean between the island and Gaul was blood-red at flood tide.

An excuse for the war was found in the confiscation of the sums of money that Claudius had given to the foremost Britons; for these sums, as Decianus Catus the procurator maintained, were to be paid back. This was one reason for the uprising; another was the fact that Seneca, in the hope of receiving a good rate of interest, had lent to the islanders forty million sesterces they did not want and then called in this loan all at once and had taken severe measures in exacting it. But the person who was chiefly instrumental in rousing the natives and persuading them to fight the Romans, the person who was thought worthy to be their leader and who conducted the entire war, was Boudica, a Briton woman of the royal family, and possessed of greater intelligence than often belongs to women. This woman assembled her army of 120,000 and then ascended a tribunal which had been constructed of earth in the Roman fashion. In stature she was very tall, in appearance most terrifying, in the glance of her eye most fierce, and her voice was harsh; a great mass of the tawniest hair fell to her hips; around her neck was a large golden necklace; and she wore a tunic of divers colours over which a thick mantle was fastened with a brooch. This was her invariable attire.

DIO CASSIUS PART TWO –  BOUDICA PREPARES HER ARMIES FOR WAR

She now grasped a spear to aid her in terrifying all beholders and spoke as follows:

You have learned from direct experience how different is freedom from slavery. Hence, although some of you may previously, through ignorance, have been deceived by the alluring promises of the Romans, yet, now that you have experienced both, you have learnt how great a mistake you made in preferring an imported despotism to your ancestral way of life, and you now realise how much better is poverty with no master than wealth with slavery. For what shameful or grievous treatment have we not suffered ever since these men came to Britain? Have we not been totally robbed of our possessions and those the greatest, while for those that remain we pay taxes? Besides pasturing and tiling for them, do we not pay a yearly tribute for our very bodies? How  much better to have been sold to masters once and for all than, possessing empty titles of freedom, have to ransom ourselves every year! How much better to have perished than to go about with a tax on our heads! Why do I mention death? Even dying is not free of expense  – you know what fees we deposit even for our dead. Among the rest of  mankind death frees even the slaves – only in the case of  the Romans do the dead stay alive for profit. Why is that, though none of us has any money (how indeed could we or where could we get it?), we are stripped and despoiled like a murderer’s victim? Why should the Romans display later moderation when they have behaved in this fashion at the beginning when all men show consideration even for newly captured animals.

The plain truth is that we ourselves are responsible for these evils because we allowed them to set foot on our island in the first place as we did their famous Julius Caesar – yes and we did not deal with them far away as we dealt with Augustus and Gaius Caligula and made even the attempt to sail here a hazardous venture. As a consequence,  though we inhabit so large an island or, rather, a continent one might say encircled by the sea and, although we possess a world of our own separated by the ocean from the rest of mankind that we have been believed to dwell on a different earth and under a different sky. Some of the outside world, even the wisest men, have not known for a certainty the name by which we are known, and through all this we have been trampled underfoot by men who know nothing but how to secure gain. However, even at this late day, though we have not done so before, let us, my countrymen, friends and kinsmen – for I consider you all kinsmen seeing that we dwell on a single island and are called by a common name – let us, I say, so our duty while we still remember what freedom is so that we may leave to our children not only the same name but the reality. For if we utterly forget the happy state in which we were born and bred what will they do reared in bondage?

All this I say to you not to inspire hatred of the present conditions  – that hatred you have already – not with fear of the future – that fear you have already – but of commending you now, of your own accord, choose the requisite course of action, and of thanking you for so readily co-operating with me and with each other. Have no fear whatever of the Romans; for they are superior to us neither in numbers nor in bravery. And here is the proof: they have protected themselves with palisades, walls and trenches to ensure they suffer no harm when attacked by their enemies. They are thus influenced by their fears when they adopt this kind of fighting in preference to our style of rough and ready action. Indeed, we enjoy such an excess of bravery, we see our tents as safer than their walls and our shields as better protection than their whole suits of armour. Consequently, when we are victorious we capture them, but when we are overpowered we slip away; and if we ever choose to retreat anywhere, we hide in marshes and mountains so remote that we cannot be found and captured. Our enemies, however, cannot pursue anyone because of their heavy armour, and cannot run away; and if they ever do manage to escape us, they take refuge in certain areas, shutting themselves up in a trap.

But these are not the only ways in which they are inferior to us; there is the fact that they cannot stand hunger, thirst, cold or heat as we can. They need shade and shelter and have to have kneaded bread, wine and oil and if they cannot get these, they die. On the other hand, any grass or root serves us as bread, any plant juice as oil, and water as wine, any tree as a house. Furthermore, we know this region and it is thus our friend, but to them it is unknown and hostile. As for the rivers, we swim them naked but they cross them with difficulty, even with boats. Therefore, let us go boldly against them, trusting to good fortune. Let us show them that they are hares and foxes trying to rule over dogs and wolves.

When she had finished speaking, she used a certain type of foretelling  – letting a hare escape from the folds of her dress and since it ran in what they considered to be a lucky direction, the whole assembly shouted with pleasure.

Boudica, raising her hand toward the heavens, said:

I thank thee, Andraste, and call upon thee, woman to woman.  I do not rule over Egyptians bearing burdens as Nicrotis did, nor over bartering Assyrians as Seramis did (this much learning we have gained from the Romans). Much less do I rule Romans as Messalina once did, and afterwards Agrippina and now Nero (who, though he had a man’s name, is in fact a woman which is proved by his singing, lyre playing and beautifying his person); no, those I rule are Britons  – men who do not know how to till the soil or ply a trade but men who are so skilled in war and hold all things in common even the children and wives who are as brave as the men. As the queen of such men and women, I ask and pray for victory, the preservation of life and freedom from unjust, insolent, insatiable and impious men - if we can call these people men who bathe in warm water, eat artificial dainties, drink unmixed wine, anoint themselves with myrrh, sleep on soft couches with boys for bedfellows  – boys past their prime at that and are slaves to a lyre player, and a poor one too. Therefore, this Mistress Domitia-Nero will not rule over me or you men any longer; let the woman sing and lord it over the Romans which they surely deserve after submitting to her for so long. But for us, Mistress, be thou alone our leader.

Having finished her appeal to her people, Boudica led her army against the Romans. They, by chance, were without a leader as Paulinus, their commanding officer, had gone on an expedition to Mona, an island near Britain.

DIO CASSIUS PART THREE THE REVOLT

Having finished her appeal to her people, Boudica led her army against the Romans. They, by chance, were without a leader as Paulinus, their commanding officer, had gone on an expedition to Mona (Anglesey), an island near Britain. This enabled her to sack and plunder two Roman cities, and, as I have said, to inflict unspeakable slaughter. Those taken captive by the Britons were subjected to every known form of outrage. The worst and most bestial atrocity committed by their captors was as follows: they hung up naked the most noble and distinguished women and then cut off their breasts and sewed them into their mouths to make it appear their victims were eating them. Afterwards they impaled the women on sharp skewers run lengthwise through the entire body. All this they did with sacrifices, feasts, and wanton behaviour in their sacred places, but particularly in the grove of Andraste. That was their name for Victory and they regarded her with greatest reverence.

DIO CASSIUS PART FOUR THE FINAL BATTLE

Now it happened that Paulinus had already brought Mona (Anglesey) to terms and on hearing of the disaster in Britain, he at once set sail thither from Mona. However, he did not want to risk an immediate battle with the barbarians, as he feared their numbers and desperation so he was inclined to wait for a more convenient time. He grew short of food and the barbarians pressed relentlessly around him, he was forced to face them, though it was against his better judgement.

Boudica rode in her chariot at the head of about 230,000 men and assigned the chariots to their places. Paulinus could not extend his line along the whole length of hers for, even had the men been drawn up one deep, they would not have reached far enough – so superior were they in numbers; nor did he join battle in a single compact force for fear of being surrounded and cut to pieces. Therefore he separated the army into three divisions so he could fight at several points at the same time and he made each division so strong it could not be easily broken.

While ordering his men he encouraged them saying:

Up, fellow soldiers! Onwards Roman! Show these accursed savages how far we surpass them even when in the middle of misfortune. It would be shameful for you to lose with disgrace what you won with glory a short time ago. Many times have we, and our fathers, conquered far more numerous enemies than we face at the present. Do not fear their numbers or their spirit of rebellion, for their their bravery rests on nothing more than their headlong rashness, not arms and training. Do not fear them because they have burned a couple of cities for they did not capture them by force or after a battle  – one was betrayed and the other abandoned to them. Make them pay the proper penalty for these deeds and make them learn by experience the difference between us, the wronged, and themselves.       

After this address to one division, he spoke to another:

Now is the time, fellow soldiers, for zeal and daring. If you show bravery today you will recover all that you have lost; if you overcome these foes no one else will stand against us. With one battle you will secure the present possessions and subdue what remains; everywhere our soldiers will emulate you and enemies will be terror-stricken even if they are in foreign lands. Therefore, your fathers left you and those you have gained in addition or else to be deprived of them altogether. Choose to be free, to rule, to live in wealth and to enjoy prosperity rather than suffer the opposite by lack of effort. 

To the third division he said:

You have heard what outrages these damnable men have committed against us  – indeed, you have witnessed some of them. Choose, then, whether you wish to suffer the same treatment  yourselves and be driven out of Britain entirely,or else, by conquering, to avenge those that have perished and at the same time, to furnish to the rest of mankind an example of benevolent clemency towards the obedient but of inevitable severity towards the rebellious.  For my part I hope above all that victory will be ours; first because the gods are our allies (for they almost always side with those who have been wronged); second because of the courage that is our heritage, since we are Romans and have triumphed over all mankind because of our valour; next because of our experience (for we have defeated and subdued these very men who now face us) and lastly, because of our prestige (for those whom we are about to fight are not foes but our slaves whom we conquered even when they were free and independent). Yet if the outcome should prove contrary to my hope, for I will not back away from mentioning the possibility  – it would be better to die bravely fighting than to be captured and impaled, to look upon our entrails cut from our bodies, to be spitted on red hot skewers, to die by being melted in boiling water  – in a word, to suffer as though we had been thrown to lawless and impious wild beasts. Let us either conquer them or die here. Britain will be a noble monument for us though all other Romans are driven out, for then our bodies shall forever possess the land.

After these and other like words he raised the signal for battle. The armies approached each other, the barbarians with great shouting and threatening battle songs, but the Romans silently until they were within a javelin's throw of the enemy. Then, whilst the enemy were still advancing, at a walk, the Romans rushed forward at a signal and charged them with great speed, and when the clash came, easily broke through their ranks, but as they were outnumbered they had to fight everywhere at once. Their struggle took many forms. Light- armed troops exchanged missiles with light-armed, heavy-armed opposed heavy-armed, cavalry clashed against cavalry, and the archers contended with the chariots of the barbarians. The barbarians would assail the Romans with a rush of chariots but, as they fought without breastplates, would themselves be driven back by arrows. Horsemen would overthrow footsoldier and footsoldier strike down horseman. A group of Romans, forming in close order, would advance to meet the chariots and others would be scattered by them; a band of Britons would come to close quarters with the archers and rout them while others were content to dodge the shafts at a distance. All this was not in one place but in all three divisions at once. They fought for a long time – both parties being driven by the same zeal and daring. But finally, late in the day, the Romans prevailed and they slew many in battle beside the wagons and in the forest, and captured many alive. Nevertheless some made their escape, preparing to fight again. However, Boudica fell sick and died. The Britons mourned her deeply and gave her a costly burial, but feeling that now at last they were really defeated, they scattered to their homes. So much for affairs in Britain                                                          

About the author: Dio Cassius (or Cassius Dio) Cocceianus (c A.D. 150 - 235) lived long after the events he describes here.  The editors of Loeb edition of his works consider that he wrote the volume which includes the Boudica incident some time between 214 and 226. The Encyclopaedia Britannica comments in its article on Dio:

Dio’s industry was great and the various offices he held gave him opportunities for historical investigation. His narrative shows the hand of the practised soldier and politician; the language is correct and free from affectation. But his work, although far more than a mere compilation, is not remarkable for impartiality, vigour of judgement or critical historical faculty.

The offices which Dio Cassius held included those of administrator, advocate, senator, aedile (a magistrate who had the charge of games, markets, public buildings, and police) questor (an investigator, prosecutor or judge in murder cases), consul (one of the two chief magistrates in the Roman republic), proconsul (governor of a province), and legate (ambassador). The long speech which he puts into the mouth of Boudica may reflect some of his own skills as an advocate, magistrate or judge. Dio himself understood and had had experience of both power and politics, and their implications in the military situation he describes would not have been lost on him.     

Dio wrote originally in Greek, not Latin. It is interesting that his (Greek) spelling of her name is Βουδουικα  or Boudouika. The i before the k has an accent over it, thus: ˆ 

APPENDIX  3 – BOUDICA TEXTS  

FROM HENRIETTA MARSHALL OUR ISLAND STORY

Edited by Robert M. Guyver for College of St Mark and St John PGCE and BEd courses 2004 - 2005

CHAPTER V – THE STORY OF A WARRIOR QUEEN

PART ONE – INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Although the Britons had lost their great general Caractacus, still they would not yield to the Roman tyrants.

Soon another brave leader arose. This leader was a woman. Her name was Boadicea, and she was a queen. She ruled over that part of the country which is now called Norfolk and Suffolk.

As I said before, the Romans were a very greedy people. They wanted to take away the freedom of Britain and make the island into a Roman province. They also wanted to get al. l the money and possessions which belonged to the Britons for themselves.

The husband of Boadicea knew how greedy the Romans were, and when he was about to die he became very sad. He was afraid That the Roman Emperor would rob his wife and daughters of all their money, when be was no longer there to take care of them. So, to prevent this, he made the Emperor a present of half of his money and lands, and gave the other half to his wife arid chil­dren. Then he died happy, thinking that his dear ones would be left in peace.

PART TWO – THE ROMANS INSULT THE ICENI

But the greedy Romans were not pleased with only half of the dead king’s wealth. They wanted the whole. So they came and took it by force. Boadicea was a very brave woman. She was not afraid of the Romans and she tried to make them give back what they had stolen from her.

Then these cruel, wicked men laughed at her. And because she was a woman and had, they thought, no one to protect her, they beat her with rods and were rude to her daughters.

But although the Romans were clever, they sometimes did stupid things. They thought very little of their own women, and they did not understand that many of the women of Britain were as brave and as wise as the men, and quite as difficult to conquer.

After Boadicea had been so cruelly and unjustly treated, she burned with anger against the Romans. Her heart was full only of thoughts of revenge. She called her people together, and, standing on a mound of earth, so that they could see and hear her, she made a speech to them. She told them first how shamefully the Romans bad behaved to her, their Queen. Then, like Caractacus, she reminded them how their forefathers had fought against Julius Caesar, and had driven the Romans away for a time at least. ‘Is it not better to be poor and free than to have great wealth and be slaves?’ she asked. ‘And the Romans take not only our freedom but our wealth. They want to make us both  slaves and beggars. Let us rise. O brothers and sisters, let us rise, and drive these robbers out of our land! Let us kill them every one! Let us teach them that they are no better than hares and foxes, and no match for greyhounds! We will fight, and if we cannot conquer, then let us die – yes, everyone of us, rather than submit!’

Queen Boadicea looked so beautiful and fierce as she stood there, with her blue eyes flashing, and her golden hair blowing round her in the wind, that the hearts of her people were filled with love for her and anger against the Romans. As she spoke, fierce desires for revenge grew in them. They had hated their Roman conquerors before, now the hatred became a madness.

So, when Boadicea had finished speaking a cry of rage rose from The Britons. They beat upon their shields with their swords, and swore to avenge their Queen. to fight and die for her and for their country.

Then Boadicea leaning with one hand upon her spear, and lifting the other to heaven - prayed. She prayed to the goddess of war and her prayer was as fierce as her speech, for she had never heard of a God who taught men to forgive their enemies.

As she stood there praying, Boadicea looked more beautiful than ever. Her proud head was thrown back and the sun shone upon her lovely hair and upon the golden band which bound her forehead. Her dark cloak, slipping from her shoulders, showed the splendid robe she wore beneath, and the thick and heavy chain of gold round her neck. At her feet knelt her daughters, sobbing with hope and fear.

It was a grand and awful moment and deep silence fell upon the warriors as they listened to the solemn words. Then, with wild cries, they marched forward to battle, forgetful of everything but revenge.

PART THREE BOADICEA’S ATTACKS ON THE CITIES

The battles which followed were terrible indeed. The words of Queen Boadicea had stirred the Britons until they were mad with thoughts of revenge, and hopes of freedom.  They gave no mercy, and they asked none. They utterly destroyed the towns of London and of St. Albans, or Verulamium as it was then called, killing every one, man, woman and child.

Again and again the Romans were defeated, till it almost seemed as if the Britons really would succeed in driving them out of the country. Boadicea herself led the soldiers, encouraging them with her brave words. ‘It is better to die with honour than to live in slavery,’ she said. ‘I am a woman, but I would rather die than yield. Will you follow me, men?’ and of course the men followed bet gladly.

At last the Roman Leader was so downcast with his many defeats that he went himself to the British camp. Bearing in his hand a green branch as a sign of peace. When Boadicea was told that an ambassador from The Romans wished to speak to her, she replied proudly, ‘My sword alone shall speak to the Romans.’ And when the Roman leader asked for peace, she answered, ‘You shall have peace, peace, but no submission.. A British heart will choose death rather than lose liberty. There can be peace only if you promise to leave the country.’

Of course the Romans would not promise to go away from Britain, so the war continued, and for a time the British triumphed.

PART FOUR   THE FINAL BATTLE

But their triumph did not last long.  The Roman soldiers were better armed and better drilled than the British. There came a dark day when The Britons were utterly defeated and many thousands were slain.

When Boadicea saw that all hope was gone, she called her daughters to her. ‘My children,’ she said sadly. as she took them by the hand and drew them towards her, ‘my children, it has not pleased the gods of battle to deliver us from the power of the Romans. But there is yet one way of escape.’ Tears were in her blue eyes as she kissed her daughters. She was no longer a queen of fury but a loving mother.

Then taking a golden cup in her hands, ‘Drink,’ she said gently.

The eldest daughter obeyed proudly and gladly, but the younger one was afraid. ‘Must I, mother?’ she asked timidly.

‘Yes, dear one,’ said Boadicea gently. ‘I too will drink, and we shall meet again.’

When the Roman soldiers burst in upon them they found the great queen dead, with her daughters in her arms.

She had poisoned both herself and them, rather than that they should fall again into the hands of the Romans.

 From OUR ISLAND STORY by Henrietta Marshall (pages 17 - 21)

 

 

Figure 1 – A.S.Forrest’s famous illustration for Henrietta Marshall’s chapter on Boadicea in Marshall, H.E. (1904) Our Island Story. London: Nelson.
APPENDIX 4 – BOUDICA TEXTS – FROM R.J. UNSTEAD PEOPLE IN HISTORY

 

BOADICEA  QUEEN OF THE ICENI  by R.J.Unstead

 R.J.Unstead (1957) People in History. London: A & C Black (pages 19 – 24).

 Edited by Robert M. Guyver for College of St Mark and St John PGCE and BEd courses 2004 - 2005

 PART ONE – INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Soon after the Romans came to rule Britain, Boadicea became Queen of the Iceni tribe. She is the first heroine in our history. The Iceni lived in that part of England we flow call Norfolk and Suffolk. They were farming people, famous for their horses and cattle, and they were also fierce, brave fighters.

 Boadicea’s husband, King of the Iceni, had made friends with the Romans, because when he thought them strong and wise. When he was dying, he gave them half his kingdom.

 That will please the Romans,’ he said, ‘and they will leave the Queen and my children to rule in peace.’

 PART TWO – THE ROMANS INSULT THE ICENI

But after he died, the Romans said he owed them a great sum of money. They said that the Iceni must pay heavy taxes.

 Boadicea knew this was not true. With her two daughters, she went proudly to see Catus, an important Roman officer. But Catus laughed at her rudely, telling her she must pay the money if she wanted to remain a queen.

 ‘I am Queen of a proud people,’ she answered, ‘and my husband was your friend. Take care you do not make me your enemy!’

 Catus grew angry at these words and ordered his soldiers to turn the British queen away. They pushed Boadicea and her daughters roughly from the great courtyard. They beat her servants with their spears and laughed loudly as they went away.

 Boadicea was very angry.  When she told her people of this cruel treatment, they seized their spears and cried:

 ‘Let us drive these Romans out of our land!’

 PART THREE – BOADICEA’S ATTACKS ON THE TOWNS

Other tribes and chiefs were growing tired of the powerful Romans, and they rushed eagerly to join the Iceni. Soon, the tall handsome queen was at the head of a great army ready to attack the Romans­.

 At this time, Paulinus, the Roman Gov­ernor, was away fighting the Druids in Wales. So the Britons, led by Boadicea in her war-chariot, swept down upon the new Roman towns. They burned them to the ground, and they killed thousands of Roman citizens and Britons who had made friends with them.


Figure 2 – Illustration by J.C.B. Knight in text of Unstead, R.J. (1957) People in History. London: A&C Black.

 Shortly afterwards they beat the Roman Ninth Legion in a battle, and went on to burn down a new town, called London.

 PART FOUR –  THE FINAL BATTLE

When Paulinus heard this news, he tur­ned back from Wales to fight Boadicea. He chose a place for his army on a slope, with a wood behind for protection. Before the battle, he spoke to his men

 ‘Soldiers and fellow-Romans!  To-day we fight for Rome. We have better spears and sharper swords than these barbarians. They are led by a man. See! They even have women in their ranks. Stand firm, be brave!  Then we shall soon defeat this mob of savages!’

 The Britons came to the battle certain of victory.  Behind them were waggons full of plunder from the towns, and also their wives and children.

 When Boadicea saw Paulinus talking to his men, she stood up in her chariot and cried to her people:

 ‘The Romans treat us like slaves They call us barbarians! Let us show them we are free men and women.  Let us fight them and beat them back into the sea!’

 

 Figure 3 – Illustration by J.C.B. Knight in text of Unstead, R.J. (1957) People in History. London: A & C Black.

 With a great shout, the Britons charged wildly at the Roman ranks.

 But Paulinus and his men stood firm, making a wall of their shields which even the chariots could not break. Then the Roman soldiers, step by step, drove the Britons back towards the waggons. Thousands of men, women and children were killed.  Those who were left turned and fled from the battlefield.

Boadicea, her daughters and a few followers, escaped into a wood. But the unhappy queen knew that all was lost. She was certain that the Romans would show her no mercy, so she took her life by taking poison.  Her two daughters died in the same way.

 This was the last great battle between the Britons and the Romans, who ruled our land for nearly four hundred years.

 R.J.Unstead (1957) People in History. London: A & C Black. (pages 19 – 24)

APPENDIX 5  – BOUDICA TEXTS – FROM CHAPTER 1 (‘BOADICEA’) MICHAEL WOOD IN SEARCH OF THE DARK AGES

The text used for the teaching sessions was from Wood, M. (1981; re- published 2001) In Search of the Dark Ages. London: Ariel Books (BBC). The text was sub-divided into 4 parts, like the other texts. This corresponds with divisions in the original Wood text and Wood’s subtitles have been used except for the first section (‘Britons and Romans does not start at the very beginning of his chapter). Breaking it down into four parts was done for practical, educational and academic reasons to raise awareness of the work of historians and the relationship this has with contemporary texts and other later (e.g. juvenile) interpretations. The recommendation is that readers acquire their own copies of the Wood text (now published by BBC Books (2001)). See section on how to buy these books on page 5 of this booklet.

This paragraph from Part 1 shows Wood’s ability to make modern comparisons:

The limited circulation of Icenian coinage, and its small-scale manufacture, could suggest that their rulers were unfamiliar with the use of coinage as a means of trade and very likely did not understand the principles of finance. This would explain much of what followed. Rather like the British administrators did in the Raj, the Romans let the Iceni retain some privileges and a token independence in return for the payment.of tribute, the provision of auxiliary recruits for the Roman army, and the acceptance of ‘aid’. ‘Aid as imperialism’ is not a new concept and like many Third World countries today the Iceni accepted loans from Roman financiers to help them become, by degrees, ‘Romanised’. This probably involved buying Roman luxury products just as it might today include, say, buying a Coca-Cola monopoly. But Prasutagus can hardly have known what he was letting himself in for. The kind of men who were behind the loans in Rome understood all too well the dictates of international finance. The emperor’s tutor, Seneca, was one; a philosopher and a poet, a clever, rich man who intended to get richer.

PART 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND (BRITONS AND ROMANS)   

Begins Boadicea has a place of her own in British folk history.
Ends
but the veterans did not prove to be model citizens

PART 2  COLCHESTER: ‘BLATANT SYMBOL OF ALIEN IMPERIALISM’

 Begins Camulodunum, or Colchester as we shall call it …

Ends Facilis’ tombstone had been broken in half and his haughty nose knocked off.

 PART 3 THE REVOLT SPREADS

Begins Things now took on a momentum of their own.

Ends a pitched battle with Suetonius’ legions.

 PART 4 THE LAST BATTLE

Begins Where did the climactic battle of the war take place?

Ends Her memorial lies in the pages of the historians of her bitterest enemies.

Another text which is worth examining is Snow, P. and Snow, D. (2004) Battlefield Britain (also BBC Books). It is the book supporting the TV series of the same name. They have a different interpretation from Michael Wood’s about the location of the final battle. Wood places this near Mancetter. The Snow father and son team place it further south nearer to St Albans (Verulamium).


 Figure 4 – Map of Roman Britain in Wood


APPENDIX 6  – BOUDICA QUESTIONNAIRE MARK 1 (1996/7)

Questionnaire about Boudica exercise

Name ………          Date 27.03.1997


1. How would you describe the process you applied to the two sources (Tacitus and Dio Cassius) to make the story

 

(a) understandable for children?

 

(b) enjoyable for children?

 

2. What bits would you consider to be


(a) too complex for children? The vast amounts of information within each source, 

     (unclear: i.e. Unstead)

 

(b) unsuitable for children?

 

3. What items of contextual knowledge would you consider to be essential for scene-setting before approaching this story through the sources?

 

a.

 

b.

 

c.

 

d.

 

e.

 

other

 

4. What use, if any, did you make of additional secondary sources? Please comment on their usefulness/limitations.

(a) Michael Wood’s In Search of the Dark Ages (chapter on Boadicea) yes/no

      comment

 

(b) story from Henrietta Marshall’s Our Island Story

 

(c) story from RJ Unstead’s People in History

 

5. Would you use any of these direct with children?

    Which?                                                    How?

APPENDIX 7   BOUDICA QUESTIONNAIRE MARK 2 (1998 – 1999)

Questionnaire about Boudica exercise. November 24th 1998

This was originally presented as a table with spaces for answers

1 a) How would you describe the process you would apply to the two Roman sources (Tacitus and Dio Cassius) to make the story understandable for children?

 

1 b) How would you describe the process you would apply to the two Roman sources (Tacitus and Dio Cassius) to make the story enjoyable for children?

 

2 (a) What bits would you consider to be too complex for children?

 

2 (b) What bits would you consider to be unsuitable for children?

 

3. What items of contextual (background) knowledge would you consider to be essential for scene-setting before approaching this story through the sources?

 

4. (a – c) What use, if any, did you make/would you make of additional secondary sources? Please comment on their usefulness/limitations. Please say whether you would use any of these direct with children, or what process you would apply to them to render them useful for teaching purposes.  

 

4 a) Secondary/supplementary source: Michael Wood's In Search of The Dark Ages (chapter on Boadicea)

 

4 b) Secondary/supplementary source: story from Henrietta Marshall’s Our Island Story

 

4 c) Secondary/supplementary source: story from RJ Unstead's People in History.

 

5. What other sources/resources would you think it necessary to use?

 

6. a)Would you need to use any of the above sources to enhance your own subject knowledge?

 

6. b) How would you go about this?

 

7. Give (using back of this A3 sheet) a brief outline of a lesson plan of a session which you are introducing the topic of Boudica

 

With many thanks for your co-operation and help Robert M. Guyver November 23rd 1998


APPENDIX 8   BOUDICA QUESTIONNAIRE MARK 3 (1999 – 2000)

Name …………………..      

 

You have been given one of a possible four parts of the story. For each of the 5 sources

(Tacitus, Dio, Unstead, Marshall, Wood) please could you complete each of these tasks:

 

1.       What do the Tacitus and Dio extracts have in common?

 

Please highlight the text in the booklet and number each block 1.

 

2.       In what ways are the Tacitus and Dio extracts different? (Please summarise here)

 

What do the Unstead and Marshall texts have in common?

 

Please highlight the text in the booklet and number each block 3.

 

4.In what ways are the Unstead and Marshall texts different? (Please summarise here)

 

5.       The Unstead text: highlight the parts of Unstead that indicate awareness of Tacitus and/or Dio. Please initial text blocks with T or D or both T and D.

 

Please highlight the text in the booklet and number each block 5 as well as T or D or both T and D.

 

6.       The Marshall text: highlight the parts of Marshall that indicate awareness of Tacitus and/or Dio. Please initial text blocks with T or D or both T and D.

 

Please highlight the text in the booklet and number each block 6 as well as T or D or both T and D.

 

7.       The Marshall text: What parts of Marshall show a departure from any aspects of the original narrative in Tacitus and Dio? (Please summarise here)

 

8.       The Unstead text: what parts of Unstead show a departure from any aspects of the original narrative in Tacitus and Dio? (Please summarise here)

 

9.       The Unstead text: which parts of Tacitus and Dio has R.J. Unstead chosen to ignore, précis, re-state, or edit? (Please summarise here)

 

10.    The Marshall text: which parts of Tacitus and Dio has H.E. Marshall chosen to ignore, précis, re-state or edit? (Please summarise here)

 

11.   The Tacitus text: which parts of the Tacitus text are unlikely to have been based on the eyewitness account of his father-in-law Agricola? (Please summarise here)

 

12.   The Dio text: which parts of the Dio text are likely to have been pure speculation, imagination or guesswork? (Please summarise here)

 

13.   The Wood text: which parts of the Wood account would you use with children to provide ‘a contextual frame of reference’ – background to the story? (Please summarise here)

 

14.   What sources (or what types of sources) is Wood using beyond the Tacitus and Dio accounts to extend his explanatory narrative?

 


APPENDIX 9Article on ‘Boudicca texts’ by Robert Guyver in Teaching History (2001)

* The Historical Association’s practice (in its publication, Teaching History) of using footnotes, has been dropped in favour of the use of the Harvard Referencing System in this extract.

Working with Boudicca texts – contemporary, juvenile and scholarly

Teaching History 103 pp 32 – 35

Robert Guyver describes a model for teaching Boudicca’s rebellion to pupils aged 7 to 13. Drawing upon the now traditional emphasis on critical source evaluation in British secondary school history, he nonetheless shuns aspects of that tradition – such as the ‘Death by Gobbets A to F’ approach in many textbooks – in favour of more in-depth engagement with longer text extracts. Like Tony McAleavy in his work on ‘interpretations of history’ at Key Stages 2 and 3 (1993) Robert recommends the use of old history textbooks to pupils think about features of some historical writing. Unselfconscious narratives and unsubstantiated claims of teaching materials used fifty or a hundred years ago betray little sense of evidentiality. Can pupils spot the conventions at work that render such accounts naïve to the more modern ear? This direct work on interpretations and their construction can be an effective ‘way in’ to more traditional work on source evaluation. With the National Literacy Strategy making ‘active reading’ techniques and reflection on text-types a normal part of the Key Stage 2 and 3 routine in all subjects, such developed, extended reading and thinking is now increasingly realistic for a wider ability range. Robert’s article complements Richard Cunningham’s efforts (writing in Issue 102) to get his year 8 pupils to understand the extent to which historical claims are made up of opinion; and should perhaps be contrasted with Phil Smith’s article on evidential understanding in the same edition.

The section above was written by Christine Counsell, Editor of Teaching History. The articles to which she refers are:

McAleavy, T. (1993) ‘Using the Attainment Targets in Key Stage 3: Attainment Target 2 – Interpretations of History’, Teaching History 72. 

Cunningham, R. (2001) ‘Teaching pupils how history works’, Teaching History, 102, February. 

Smith, P. (2001) ‘Why Gerry now likes evidential work’, Teaching History, 102, February.

Teaching Boudicca – problem or opportunity?

The story of Boudicca (or, as she was fondly known before historians brainwashed us, Boadicea) is taught in most primary schools in England and in many secondary schools in the context of the Key Stage 3 unit, ‘A European Study before 1914’. Texts on the story fall broadly into three categories: contemporary or near contemporary sources (i.e. Roman); stories written for children or young adults; and historians’ accounts. A vast range of material is available on Celtic and Roman history and culture, and hundreds of books have been written for young people, both factual and fictional. Inevitably some selection must be made. What kinds of issues should inform that selection?

The problems arising are quite often rooted in the teacher’s own knowledge, as it is more than likely that this topic will be taught either by non-specialists, or by those who are specialists but not in this period. McNamara discusses the implications of this:   

Teachers’ subject matter knowledge influences the way in which they teach and teachers who know more about a subject will be more interesting and adventurous in the ways they teach and more effective. Teachers with only a limited knowledge of a subject may avoid teaching difficult or complex aspects of it and teach in a didactic manner which avoids pupil participation and questioning and fails to draw upon children’s experience. (McNamara, 1991, p 113)

Yet, with adequate preparation, there is no reason why non-specialist teachers should not be able (a) to use the story of Boudicca as a vehicle for focusing on complex issues and (b) to offer alongside an engagement with a rage of texts the opportunity to participate in some interesting forms of presentation. What matters is teacher understanding of the distinctions between types and purposes of text in history and, crucially, the teacher’s ability to reflect on ways of teaching pupils how historical sources can be linked and evaluated, and how subsequent accounts of ‘interpretations’ (in McAleavy’s sense) are constructed (McAleavy, 1993). This forms the essential, underpinning ‘subject knowledge’ that all teachers of history need.   

The sources and the activities

The following account is based on initial teacher training sessions on the teaching the Romans. The sources that I have used are: Tacitus’s Annals of Imperial Rome and Dio’s Roman History; R.J.Unstead’s chapter Queen of the Iceni in People in History (1957); Henrietta Marshall’s The Story of a Warrior Queen in Our Island Story (1904); and Boadicea, chapter 1 of Michael Wood’s In Search of the Dark Ages (1981). There are copyright issues associated with using whole chapters of works less than 50 years old, though for the purpose of this exercise each of the texts was divided into four parts, corresponding broadly with four parts of the story. Tacitus is the earliest source (c 100 AD) and is perhaps the most reliable as his father-in-law, Agricola, was a soldier in the campaign. 

The topic has been taught in two ways, either using the texts to prepare for a presentation or using them purely for critical appraisal, analysis and comparison. The presentation session involves splitting the cohort into four with approximately six students in each group and giving them time to prepare for a role-play or other kind of presentation based on the story in their part of the texts.  The role-play has taken many forms, most of which inevitably have an element of anachronism. A news report from the front line, a ‘Newsnight’ interview, a report from a United Nations Observer, a This is Your Life Boudicca, and even a cooking recipe.

Tackling the texts

Comparing and contrasting the texts takes us into the familiar questions of reliability, typicality and utility, as well as ways in which both earlier and later texts were constructed. A simple and motivating way to begin this, is to compare a written text with a picture. This might be done in order to initiate reflection on how an interpretation – here, a very obvious subsequent interpretation created in a totally different setting and for a different purpose – might (or might not) have drawn upon a contemporary or near contemporary source.  Thus Dio’s description of Boudicca can usefully be compared with A.S.Forrest’s famous portrait (given as Figure 2 in article; this corresponds with Figure 22 above in Appendix 33; just as Figure 1 in article corresponds with Figure 24 above in Appendix 34):

In stature she was very tall, in appearance most terrifying, in the glance of her eye most fierce, and her voice was harsh; a great mass of the tawniest hair fell to her hips; around her neck was a large golden necklace; and she wore a tunic of divers colours over which a thick mantle was fastened with a brooch. This was her invariable attire. (Dio, Roman History)

On reading the texts some students are, or perhaps pretend to be, shocked by the graphic detail of the atrocities committed especially by the Celts, according to Dio. Tacitus does not go into so much detail. This can be a starting point for a more probing contrast. How did Dio know, writing perhaps 80 or even 100 years after Tacitus and as much as 140 years after the events described? This is Dio’s account:

Those taken captive by the Britons were subjected to every known form of outrage …. All this they did with sacrifices, feasts, and wanton behaviour in their sacred places, but particularly in the grove of Andraste. This was their name for Victory and they regarded her with greatest reverence. (Dio, Roman History)


 

 

(Figure 3 in Teaching History article) Dio, Tacitus, Unstead and Marshall on the causes of the uprising

 

Some of the omitted text mentioning maiming and impaling would need to be edited for younger children, though many may have seen the video of the film Gladiator or even various episodes of Prime Suspect. This may be a case for what Rogers referred to as ‘spiralling’ the sources (Rogers, 1979). But what matters is that even after the necessary adaptation and omissions from the texts made by the teacher, textual questions still arise. How might the differences between Tacitus and Dio be explained? (For example, Tacitus says that Boudicca poisoned herself and her daughters, and Dio say that Boudicca fell sick and died, though perhaps these are not altogether incompatible.) How much credence should one give to the romanticisation of Boudicca by Henrietta Marshall? She inserts in her text a Hollywood-style meeting between the Roman general and Boudicca. Nowhere in Tacitus or Dio is this mentioned.

 Whether or not it is used directly with all pupils Michael Wood’s text deepens teachers’ appreciation of the complexities and subtleties of the story, and introduces shades of grey into what might initially appear to be a straight case of baddies versus goodies. Wood is an ideal read for the non-specialist teacher, primary or secondary, who will need to draw upon examples of contested issues and detail, and to elicit from pupils genuinely historical questions about the texts. Rogers outlines these issues eloquently:

 Firstly the nature of an historical narrative shows that any view of a scholarly work as merely giving information in any finalised sense is naive to the point of simple-mindedness. History often deals with matters that are essentially contested, and one function of scholarly work, and the criticism it attracts, is tacitly to show and develop the criteria of what constitutes valid historical activity – and, indeed, of what is to count as an historical question. It is by reading scholarly works, and by listening to (and perhaps joining in) the debates they arouse, that we often gain a sharp focus on the assumptions and criteria appropriate to the historical enterprise. What is at stake is, of course, partly the development of the relevant contextual frames of reference; but fundamentally it concerns the criteria for valid use of sources, for it is from these that the frames are constructed. (Rogers, 1979, pp13-14)

 It is valuable to compare the handling of one particular issue in the contemporary Roman sources with the subsequent interpretations. Figure 3 relates to the causes of the uprising, as reported, discussed or explained by Dio, Tacitus, Unstead and Marshall. The business  of the loan to Prasutagus, the royal husband of Boudicca, is outlined by Dio (though not by Tacitus). Dio offers a recognisably ‘causal’ explanation. He displays, here, the same elements of causal analysis in which today’s Year 7, 8 and 9 pupils are trained, often quite systematically, in their history lessons (see Hammond, 1999, and Howells, 1998). In the extracts in Figure 3 from Tacitus, Unstead and Marshall, however, the reasoning of historical explanation is left implicit. Recount or narrative dominates the structure of their texts. Figure 3 juxtaposes these extracts for pupil or teacher use.

 A reading of Michael Wood (1981) throws further light on the matter of the loan referred to by Dio, and looks more deeply at the causal link between the subsequent bad treatment of Boudicca and her daughters and the unscrupulous lending of money to the unwary Iceni by agents of Seneca. To achieve this Wood uses modern parallels. We could add the Third World Debt issue. Wood uses the expression ‘aid as imperialism’. The Romans were already international bankers, abusing their clients, Mafia-style, if they could not pay back the loans. Was the Iceni land appropriated in the same way that building societies re-possess properties where the mortgage can no longer be paid? (See Todd, 1999) Seneca was a statesman and satirical writer who poked fun at emperors, but his own hopes were dashed when he was forced to commit suicide in the reign of Nero in 65 AD. With which modern writer could we compare him?

 By using all of these sources the teacher need not fall into the trap described by Bage (2000). Writing about history’s discourse knowledge, Bage asserts that ‘history writers complicate and depersonalise explanations in pursuit of balance and objectivity (e.g. two points of view are considered, or a ‘third person’ stance adopted without giving readers access to the original materials from which a balance was drawn)’. 

 Similarly, Wineburg’s (1991) observations of the differences between historians and students when handling historical texts are relevant here. His research revealed that some students were treating the texts uncritically and purely for organising or transmitting information. The historians were problematising the texts, looking at issues of sub-text meaning and authorship as a necessary preparation before transforming elements from the texts and elevating the exercise to a level of debate and interpretation, or, to use Wineburg’s term, metadiscourse. Overuse of textbooks in schools may discourage the examination of the provenance of sources.

 Another way to present the sources would be in a hypertext environment where all the texts are connected in a Boudicca website (see Watson, O’Connell and Brough, 2000). Again, copyright would be an important issue to address, as two out of the five texts are still subject to copyright laws: the Unstead and the Wood. With Michael Wood’s or his publisher’s permission, hyperlinks between his chapter and the relevant extracts from Tacitus and Dio would facilitate research into the rebellion.

 Conclusion

With the current concern about pupil literacy, these activities provide a context for the development of awareness of authorship, prejudice, and interpretation. Skills developed through work which (a) analyses how authors construct text from other earlier sources, and (b) contrasts and compares approaches, are transferable to the English curriculum. This work also lies at the core of the historian’s task.

 

The use of the Michael Wood chapter throws a penumbra of scholarship around the activities, though no doubt even the Wood text will have its critics. Teachers might read Le Glay, Voisin, and Le Bohec (2001). The relationship between teachers and scholars must continue, and the Historical Association is in an ideal position to foster this. It is essential to keep teachers in touch with recent research which may challenge accepted wisdom.  

 

 Figure 6 – (Figure 4 in this Teaching History article): Phase 1 – Presentations


 

 
Figure 7 – (Figure 5 in this Teaching History article): Phase 2 –  Questioning Boudicca Texts

References

Bage, G. (2000) Thinking History 4 – 14. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Cunningham, R. (2001) ‘Teaching pupils how history works’, Teaching History, 102, February. 

Dio Cassius (c214 – 226) Roman History. (Various Editions)

Hammond, K. (1999) ‘And Joe arrives … stretching the very able pupil in the mixed ability classroom’, Teaching History 94 (Raising the Standard Edition). 

Howells, G. (1998) ‘Being ambitious with the causes of the First World War: interrogating inevitability’, Teaching History 93 (Explanation and Argument Edition).

Le Glay, M., Voisin, J-L., and Le Bohec, Y. (2001) A History of Rome (Second Edition) (with new material by D.Cherry). Oxford: Blackwell. 

Marshall, H. (1904) Our Island Story (1st Edition). London: Nelson. 

McAleavy, T. (1993) ‘Using the Attainment Targets in Key Stage 3: Attainment Target 2 – Interpretations of History’, Teaching History 72.  (See also the chapters on interpretations in the non-statutory guidance for Key Stages 2 and 3, published in 1993 by the National Curriculum Council and which was based on McAleavy’s rationale and principles for the ‘new’ curriculum component of ‘interpretations of history’.) 

McNamara, D. (1991) ‘Subject knowledge and its application: problems and possibilities for teacher educators’, Journal of Education for Teaching, Vol 17, No 2, pp 113 - 128.

Rogers, P.J. (1979) The New History: theory into practice. London: The Historical Association.

Smith, P. (2001) ‘Why Gerry now likes evidential work’, Teaching History, 102, February.

Tacitus, C. (c100) Annals of Imperial Rome. (Various Editions)

Todd, M. (1999) Roman Britain (Third Edition). Oxford: Blackwell.  (For further insight into the Romans’ financial dealings with the Iceni and others.)

Unstead, R.J. (1957) People in History. London: A.& C. Black.

Watson, K., O’Connell, K., and Brough, D. (2000) ‘Hyperlink: A Generic Tool for Exploratory and Expressive Teaching and Learning in History’, International Journal of Historical Learning Teaching and Research 1 (1) pp 97 – 110. 

Wineburg, S.S. (1991) ‘On the reading of historical texts: notes on the breach between school and academy’, American Educational Research Journal, 1991, Vol 28, No 3, pp 495 – 519.

Wineburg, S.S. (1994) ‘The cognitive representation of historical texts’, in Leinhardt, G., Beck, I., and Stainton, C. (1994) Teaching and Learning in History. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Wood, M. (1981) In Search of the Dark Ages. London: Ariel Books for the BBC.

 

APPENDIX 10  REFLECTIONS ON BOUDICA ROLE-PLAY BY FRANK BRIDGEMAN-SUTTON (PGCE STUDENT 2001 - 2002)

The Boudiccan Rebellion

 

Role-play in History

 

Background

A group of primary PGCE students took part in a role-play exercise examining the Boudiccan Rebellion.  This was done in the context of a lecture given by Robert Guyver as part of the course, providing subject knowledge and insight into methods of teaching.  The group comprised five students, four women and one man.

Prior knowledge

I had prior knowledge of the background, having read Tacitus and Dio Cassius as adjuncts to my degree in Archaeology and Anthropology, taken in 1984.  (My specialist area of interest was the La Tène Iron Age, during the period leading up to the Roman Occupation.)  Other members of the group had limited or no knowledge, except for one who had lived in Colchester and was rather more aware of the events.

The task

 The task was to research the rebellion from different perspectives, using a sympathetic near contemporary Roman source, (Tacitus), a later Roman source, (Dio Cassius), a romantic history, (Henrietta Marshall), a classic account by R.J. Unstead and with reference to more scholarly and broad-based work by Michael Wood, taking into account numismatic and other evidence beyond the contemporary and idealized accounts.  From a brief reading of the texts, we were to develop a role-play in which we could present the various views of the rebellion.

 We chose to present the different versions of history in a Newsnight format – other groups used a news report and the Jerry Springer Show as models.  In each case the media style was a vehicle for bringing together the protagonists.  I was assigned the Jeremy Paxman role on the grounds that I had the best overview of the situation; others were then able to concentrate on taking on particular roles in detail.  After reading, and some 20 minutes of rehearsal, a live debate took place.

 The debate involved four characters: Boudicca, Catus Decianus, Tacitus and that stock character of television debate, The Expert, who was able to able to refer to archaeological evidence of destruction and the sudden decline of Icenian gold in circulation.  Each student having largely read for their own character, real conflicts of view emerged.  From a position of scanty knowledge and vague romantic impressions, real passion was engendered by the exercise.

 


Learning through role-play

 The idea of role-play was met with some trepidation by a group of students with an average age of around 30.  Not only was the material unfamiliar, but both social inhibition and lack of confidence in historical methods were apparent within our group.  This initial reluctance overcome, members of the group began to read, looking for the viewpoints of their particular characters, extracting and analysing information.  There was some discussion thereafter, mainly concerned with the mechanics of the role-play and to clarify particular difficulties.  Some ideas and facts were learned at this stage, but more significant learning appeared to take place during the active part of the exercise.  

 The role-play was an effective way of learning in several ways:  as an observer it was possible to pick up both facts and attitudes that had been missed in one’s own reading.  It was entertaining and held the interest and gave a good sense of debate.  That history involves passion, disagreement and conflict was a shock to many; while facts are vital, they are not the whole of history.  Debating from a particular position was an effective means of understanding the range of interpretations that can come from a single incident.  This is historically important, of course, but has wider social implications.  That each person became genuinely involved in their role was also indicative that history can be as much about people and their actions as about political and social movements.  The diversity of history as a discipline was, from discussion afterwards, a revelation to many. 

 The use of empathy can be risky; I have encountered ‘empathetic’ versions of Iron Age culture before, so was sceptical about the role of imagination in historical research.  The myth of Druids and Stonehenge is still alive and well!  With ideas and opinions rooted in original sources and real research, this fear was largely unfounded, and there was a real engagement with the subject.

 Role-play in the primary classroom

 
I was interested to use the approach with some real children and took my chance during an RE lesson about Jesus’ expulsion of the traders from the temple.  Here, armed with two different Gospel accounts, groups of children were able to offer very different ideas of Jesus’ conduct from those affected.  The children (a mixed ability year six class) responded by taking the issues seriously and (the point of the lesson) became passionate about what Jesus was really like.  “Well, he wasn’t exactly a wimp, was he?” “He was a trouble maker”, and other views emerged.  This showed a capacity for groups to examine difficult and rather scanty texts for clues and elicited real excitement in what could have been a very dull lesson.

It is worth noting the assessment opportunities here: One group produced a mind-map of the reactions of different groups to Jesus’ actions, written evidence of high quality thought.  I was able to monitor discussions and to observe the results of the children’s work.  The children also used peer assessment to refine their views; this might have been a question of the loudest voice winning, but what I observed was reasoned and courteous.  Notably, during presentations by one group, others were learning from those who had worked from the other text and had noticed that there was a difference.  That not all children have to read every version to gain a wider understanding was a particularly valuable lesson. 

 I did not pursue the ideas, but the capacity for this to link up with other curriculum areas is substantial, particularly, but not exclusively through developing performance.

 Conclusions

A group of adults, with formed attitudes, were all enthused in varying degrees.  Some had little or no experience of history, some had had negative experiences.  I was not alone in recognising the impact that this type of activity might have on children. 

In the context of RE, and since in other contexts, I have seen evidence that this approach can be motivating; it brings about a positive engagement with the subject and develops empathy in a balanced way. 

Recognition of conflicting viewpoints has far wider implications than the historical and in the children was part of remarkably sophisticated and mature thought.  The role-play approach and presentation to the class contributed to the development of thought. 

The opportunities for assessment are rich.  This is a genuinely interactive approach, allowing for a wide range of informal assessment methods, from peer-to-peer in the course of group work, to presentation and written work.

(Frank Bridgeman-Sutton, College of St Mark and St John, April 2002)

 

back to R Guyver page