tacitus and the boudican revolt

Studies in the British Iron AgeStudies in the British Iron AgeStudies in the British Iron AgeStudies in the British Iron Age 1

CAMVLOS PUBLICATIONS

CAMVLOS PUBLICATIONS

Dublin, Ireland [email protected]

Copyright © 1998 All rights reserved

A grateful acknowledgement is made to Professor Stephen Benko, whose vivid lectures introduced me to Tacitus and fostered a passion for ancient history. I am also indebted to Professor Sir Fergus Millar for reading a draft of this paper

and for his helpful comments. Any mistakes are my own.

Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

Taylor, John Walter, 1949-

Tacitus and the Boudican revolt / by John Taylor 29 p. ; 28 cm. (Studies in the British Iron Age : 1) Includes bibliographical references 1. Tacitus, Cornelius. 2. Boadicea, Queen, d. 62. 3. Ethnology -- Great Britain. 4. Great Britain -- History -- Roman period, 55 B.C.-449 A.D. 7. I. Title. II. Series. 936.204 Cover illustration: The History of England, vol. 1: from the invasion of Julius Cæsar to the end of the reign of James the Second by David Hume. (London: James S. Virtue, 1860).

Tacitus and the Boudican Revolt

by

John Taylor

MMXIIMMXIIMMXIIMMXII

1 Tacitus and the Boudican Revolt

Sex, murder and intrigue: these are the ingredients of box-office

success. They represent powerful elements in the plot of the Annals, and

account for the popularity of its modern rendition, I, Claudius.1 Tacitus,

however, claimed that his subject matter was dull. He apologized for its

monotony and begged our indulgence for choosing a period of peace,

devoid of 'great wars, embattled cities and captured kings'.2 He regretted

the absence of momentous social struggles too, for Tacitus portrayed the

Early Principate as a despotic age in which political dissension had been

stifled. The Annals, of course, is far from dull. Its author was too

ambitious for that. It is Tacitus' most highly charged work, infused with

drama, which reaches its climax in the reign of a thoroughly debauched

and matricidal Nero.

Admittedly, Tacitus failed in his stated intent: to produce a history

without bitterness or partiality. Histories are always biased. He shows all

the prejudice of his class, and translates one of the work's principal

themes, the struggle for liberty against despotism, into the loss of

senatorial independence to oppressive and capricious autocrats. His tone

is pessimistic from the start. The prologue of the Annals reduces centuries

of Roman history to a cycle, with a liberated Republic sandwiched

between an initial tyranny of kings and an eventual tyranny of the

princeps. The loss of liberty is lamented, made worse by the spectre of


moral decline. At all levels of Roman society, virtue is supplanted by

greed, lust and brutality: those very vices which led to rebellion in Britain.

Under the year of A.D. 61, Tacitus reports a grave disaster in

Britain.3 He referred to a calamitous uprising of Celtic tribes in the South

East. Only the Iceni, (centred on Norfolk) and the Trinovantes, their

neighbours to the south, are actually named.4 Other tribes 'not yet broken

by servitude' are also mentioned,5 and it seems likely that the bellicose

Catuvellauni were among them. Under Cunobelinus,6 the Catuvellauni

and the Trinovantes were apparently merged into one kingdom.

Numismatic evidence suggests that he was striking coins at both

Verulamium and Camulodunum, tribal capitals of the Catuvellauni and

Trinovantes respectively.7 Cunobelinus died just before the Claudian

conquest, and his sons, Togodumnus and Caratacus, defiantly resisted

the Roman advance.

Earlier in the narrative, Tacitus relates that in A.D. 47 the Iceni were

already voluntary allies of Rome.8 Presumably they were represented

among the eleven kings who peacefully submitted to Claudius.9 However,

disaffection came when the governor, Ostorius Scapula, consolidated the

frontier along the Trent-Severn rivers (Fosse Way), and attempted to

disarm those tribes living within Rome's ambit. This provoked a


confederation of tribes, led by the Iceni, to revolt. It was a harbinger of the

great rebellion of A.D. 61.

It is possible that following the insurrection of A.D. 47, Prasutagus,

as a guarantor of peace in the region, came to power with the backing of

Rome. According to Tacitus, the reign of Rex Icenorum Prasutagus was

renowned for its prosperity.10 The archaeological record gives some

indication of the wealth of this tribe. Icenian territory is famous for its

hoards. Finds at Snettisham, dated to about 70 B.C., represent the

largest assemblage of Celtic precious metalwork ever found in the British

Isles. They contain an impressive array of gold and electrum torques of

the kind worn by Boudica herself.11

Before his death, Prasutagus made a will naming his two daughters

and the emperor.12 The exact details of this royal bequest are unknown,

but it was common for friendly kings without male heirs to leave their

kingdom to the princeps. His daughters may simply have been endowed

with legacies.13 If Prasutagus thought that invoking the name of the

emperor assured some measure of protection for his family, he was

seriously mistaken. Upon his death, the kingdom was looted by rapacious

centurions, his two young daughters raped, and his wife, Boudica,

savagely flogged. Their neighbours, the Trinovantes, were treated


1 2

3

1. Coin of Prasutagus, inscribed Prasto 2. Snettisham Gold Torc

3. Statue of Boudica at Westminster Bridge, London by Thomas Thornycroft 14

Plate I


with equal disdain, and were dispossessed of their land by grasping

veterans of the new colonia15. This is the way barbarians are treated, but

we are left wondering who exactly the barbarians are. Tacitus challenges

us with this ambiguity.

Tacitus is quite explicit: Roman cupidity led to conflict in Britain.

Under the leadership of Boudica, the Iceni and their allies went on the

rampage. Military installations were initially attacked, but after the sack of

Camulodunum they were apparently circumvented.16 Civil settlements,

rich in plunder, bore the brunt of native fury. The undefended colonia at

Camulodunum was razed. The veterans were forced to retreat within the

temenos of the Temple of Divus Claudius, and were massacred after a

two-day siege. The Legion IX Hispana, under the command of Petilius

Cerialis, marched to the rescue, but its infantry was cut to pieces. The

panic-stricken procurator, Catus Decianus, abandoned his province and

fled to the safety of Gaul. Londinium, an oppidum which served as a

commercial centre and supply depot, and the municipium of Verulamium

were both sacked. Tacitus claimed that 70,000 citizens and allies were

killed during the uprising.

At the outbreak of the rebellion, Suetonius Paulinus, governor of

Britain, was campaigning in North Wales and attempting to subdue the


island of Mona (Anglesey). Upon learning of the crisis, he marched south

to the defence of London, but realized he could not hold it and strategically

withdrew. At a site of his choosing,17 the opposing armies finally met.

Discipline and tactics brought victory to Legions XIV and XX, even though

they were seriously outnumbered. They were rewarded with the honorific

titles Martia Victrix and Valeria Victrix respectively.18 Britain remained a

province of the empire, and the kingdom of Prasutagus was absorbed.

LITERARY EMBELLISHMENT

The treatment of the British revolt described in the Annals is

markedly different from that found in the Agricola, which makes only a

passing reference to the rebellion in the context of the early military career

of Agricola, Tacitus' father-in-law.19 A fuller treatment appears later in the

narrative, but is largely taken up with native arguments for going to war.20

No specific grievances are given, but Tacitus implies that the Britons

found the military and financial burdens of a subject people insufferable.

They looked to Germania libera and to their ancestors who had fought

Julius Caesar as models of resistance. Boudica, leader of the revolt, is

mentioned only once.21 There is no attempt at characterization, except

that she is described as 'a woman of royal stock'. This is followed by a

brief 'ethnographical' note: 'the Britons recognize no distinction of sex


among their rulers'. The events of the actual rebellion are outlined in the

most cursory manner. A besieged colony is mentioned, but not named,

and no description is given of the deciding battle.

In the Annals, a similarly prosaic and matter-of-fact account of

Roman affairs in Armenia precedes the description of the British

insurrection.22 The narrative describing Corbulo's military operations in

the East reads like, and may well be based upon, a commentarius23.

There is little in the way of literary embellishment. By contrast, events in

Britain are presented in a startlingly vivid manner. Tacitus not only uses

style to produce dramatic effect, but employs other literary and rhetorical

techniques, which we will now examine.24

Colour

Many of Tacitus' contemporaries no doubt regarded Britain as a

distant and exotic land: another world beyond the boundaries of Ocean.25

This impression was surely confirmed by the riveting description of

Suetonius Paulinus' landing on the isle of Mona.26

On the shore stood the opposing army (acies), with its dense array

of armed warriors. Women dashed between the ranks, like Furies

dressed in black and with dishevelled hair, brandishing torches.

Round about, the Druids, raising aloft their hands towards heaven,


poured forth horrible curses. This strange sight shocked the troops

so much that their limbs (membris), as if rooted to the spot

(haerentibus), were paralysed, thus exposing their bodies to

wounds. Urged on by their commander and by mutual

encouragements not to fear a band of females and fanatics, they

charged behind their standards, struck down all they met and

engulfed them in their own flames. A garrison was imposed on the

conquered, and their sacred groves, consecrated to savage

ceremonies, were destroyed. It was their custom to cover the altars

with the blood of captives and to consult their gods by means of

human entrails.

This is pure sensationalism, designed to add colour to the narrative. It

stands in sharp contrast to the version recounted in the Agricola: 'he

attacked the island of Mona, a rallying point of rebellion'. It is also

markedly different in style from the preceding chapter (Ann. 14.29), which

describes preparations for the attack on Mona, and is probably based on

Suetonius Paulinus' own account.27

Like modern tabloid journalism, the passage cited above is

designed to shock and fascinate. Tacitus signifies to the reader that this is

an alien and barbaric world. The British women are likened to Furies,

those violent and primitive goddesses who drive their victims to madness.

However, there is little here of ethnographic value. It is the Furies, not the

Britons, who dress in black, brandish torches and have dishevelled hair.28


Tacitus found inspiration for his description of the opposing Roman and

British forces in the following passage from the Aeneid.29

postquam acies videt Iliacas atque agmina Turni, ...

hanc versa in faciem Turni se pestis ob ora

fertque refertque sonans clipeumque everberat alis.

illi membra novus solvit formidine torpor,

arrectaque horrore comae et vox faucibus haesit.

Here, Virgil describes a scene in which the Trojan and Italic armies face

each other. A Fury flits screaming in front of the hero, Turnus, and causes

him to become immobilized with fear. Some of the vocabulary used by

Virgil is repeated by Tacitus, namely the use of acies, membrum, and the

verb, haereo.

The mention of human sacrifice is Tacitus' main signifier of British

barbarity. Several sources attest to the ritual slaying of prisoners of war,

miscreants and, occasionally, innocents.30 Rome was appalled by this

practice, and despite the general atmosphere of religious tolerance and

syncretism in the Early Empire, Druidism was systematically proscribed.31

The reference to human sacrifice at this point in the narrative sets the

stage for later acts of savagery as the Britons exact their revenge.32

Tacitus portrays Boudica astride a war-chariot,33 flanked by her two


outraged daughters. It is an enduring image, translated in bronze by the

Victorian sculptor, Thomas Thornycroft. Prince Albert viewed the chariot

as the 'throne upon wheels',34 but for Tacitus it was a convenient piece of

exotica used to emphasize the alien aspects of the Britons. Caesar was

certainly struck by its novel use in combat, and it reminded Diodorus of a

bygone age of Greek heroes and the Trojan War.35 However, it is the

woman, not the vehicle that is of pivotal importance in developing the

drama of the episode. The fearless warrior-queen captures the

imagination, and her role in exhorting the British tribes to free themselves

from Roman domination led to her future veneration as a British patriot,

but in the Annals she is far from an icon of national pride. Tacitus uses her

as a manifestation of barbarism.

A sure mark of barbarian culture was a woman with political

authority. The Greek perception that women were dangerously powerful

in foreign lands,36 was a view acknowledged by some Romans.37 Tacitus

shows his prejudice against women in government in a passage from the

Germania.38 In describing the Sitones, a tribe ruled by a woman, he

remarked: 'so low have they fallen, not merely from freedom, but even

from slavery'. The governance of Rome and her empire was a man's job,

and Tacitus records the objections of Caecina Severus to the interference

of women.39 Severus proposed that magistrates sent to the provinces


should not be allowed to take their wives, because they invariably used

their position to meddle. Remarking that a retinue of women was apt to

'convert a Roman army on the march to a barbarian procession', he

makes the association between barbarism and the involvement of women

in traditional male spheres of action. Barbarian women did indeed

accompany their men to the battlefield.40

In the political climate of the Principate, a woman of the imperial

family was often more influential than most men, but her power was de

facto, and not sanctioned by law.41 It is accepted that the power of such

women in Rome was associative, being primarily obtained through their

husbands or other male relatives.42 Regarding Boudica, this was certainly

the case, and it might be said that any power exercised by Celtic women

was similarly associative.43

Aristotle thought that the Celts were exceptional among barbarians

in that they were not ruled by women.44 Caesar remarked that in Gaul

men had the power of life and death over their wives and children.45

However, in a society where wealth reflected status, it is safe to conclude

that women featured among the nobility. Richly furnished graves at sites

like Vix and Reinheim attest to this, and it is noteworthy that Boudica

herself was accorded a costly burial.46 Celtic noblewomen certainly


featured in political marriages.47 Tacitus relates that Boudica was of noble

ancestry, but he never describes her as 'queen'. Her position is defined in

relation to her husband, Prasutagus, and only after he had died was she

free to take independent action. Hers was the liberty of widowhood. By

contrast, Cartimandua of the Brigantes is called 'queen',48 but the problem

in assessing her status is that we never see her ruling in her own right.

Initially she ruled with her husband, Venutius. When she divorced him,

her position was maintained only with the support of Rome. Cartimandua

was pro-Roman, and useful in keeping much of northern England under

control. She may indeed have exercised power in Brigantia, but it is likely

that the norms of Celtic society dictated that she appeared to be acting

through a man. It is interesting in this context that after divorcing

Venutius, she promptly married his squire, Vellocatus.49 Here we are

faced with an Aristotelian situation: what difference does it make whether

the women rule or the rulers are ruled by women?50 Does this not reflect

on the situation in Rome, where powerful women such as the Tacitean

Agrippina manipulated events to suit their own political ends?51

Classical authors commonly depicted barbarians as behaving in

ways which were opposite to their own customs.52 Tacitus exploited this

topos when he emphasized the role of a barbarian woman as war-leader.

In Graeco-Roman society, war was strictly a male prerogative.53 Females


were expected to be passive. Tacitus ascribed to Boudica the remark that

it was customary for Britons to fight under a female commander, but this is

contrary to our understanding of Celtic society,54 which was patrilineal and

heroic.55 This is not to deny Boudica her place in the revolt, but rather to

emphasize her importance to Tacitus in arousing the reader's interest. As

the central figure in the British revolt -- an exotic blend of barbarian,

woman and warrior -- she serves to heighten the dramatic impact of the

episode.56

Allusion

Walker defines one element of Tacitus' narrative technique as

'allusiveness'.57 Some allusions, or indirect references, relate to the work

of other authors, which Tacitus used to suggest a comparison or an

association with well known events or episodes. For example, Martin

draws attention to the parallel between Livy's description of Tanaquil's

involvement in the succession of Servius Tullius and Tacitus' almost

identical scenes describing both Livia's part in the accession of Tiberius

and Agrippina's role in the accession of Nero.58 Occasionally, however,

the parallelism is more subtle, with no explicit comparison. This is the

case with the Boudican revolt. To the educated Roman there must have

been a conscious association between the historical Boudica and the


mythical Amazon.59 The most obvious parallel is that they were both

female warriors, and thus operated outside the normal parameters of

Graeco-Roman life. They both used chariots.60 The Amazons were

always located on the boundaries of the known world and were less

civilized.61 By association, as well as in reality, so were the Britons.

Though they were worthy opponents, the Amazons always lost their

battles against the classical male heroes,62 and this subtly sets the stage

for Boudica's eventual defeat at the hands of Suetonius Paulinus. It

symbolizes the triumph of Romanitas over barbarism, order over chaos.

Tacitus also made a subtle association between the British revolt

and Livy's account of the expulsion of the Tarquins.63 Thematically, both

episodes share a 'rape and revenge' motif. Tacitus uses Boudica's

speech to remind us of the rape of her daughters and the need for

vengeance. She appeals to heaven for justice. The violation of the two

young princesses is among the principal causes, cited by Tacitus, which

incited Boudica and her forces to rebellion. This scenario is reminiscent of

the 'Rape of Lucretia'. It is the violation of this virtuous woman which

ignites the revolt led by Lucius Brutus against the excesses of the

Tarquins. Brutus swears by the gods that he will avenge Lucretia,64 and

when he finally dies, it is for the fulfilment of this oath that the matronae

mourn him as the 'avenger of violated virtue'.65 This is an important part of


the role ascribed to Boudica by Tacitus. This cleverly leads to another

shared motif, and one of central importance to the Annals: the struggle for

freedom against tyranny.66 The shared goal of both Boudica and Brutus is

the expulsion of tyrants. Tacitus may have been ironic in casting the

Roman Empire as oppressor, and seems to sympathize with Boudica's

lament for her lost liberty. He was certainly acquainted with repression,

having lived through Domitian's reign of terror, but the real irony lies in the

fact that Tacitus, like many of his senatorial colleagues, acquiesced in the

face of despotism. Boudica took action and perished. Like her Livian

counterpart, Lucretia, she chose suicide rather than disgrace.

The centre of the imperial cult in Britain was at Camulodunum.

Worship was centred on the Temple of Divus Claudius, a major feature of

the new colony and imposing in its monumentality. It was used by Tacitus

to symbolize Roman oppression of the natives. He described it as the

'citadel of eternal despotism' (arx aeternae dominationis).67 His utilization

of the temple as a symbol parallels Livy's use of the Temple of Jupiter

Capitolinus, which signified Rome's impending greatness. The Temple of

Jupiter is described as the 'citadel of the empire' (arcem eam imperii),68

thus reinforcing the allusion through parallel language. The two temples

are antithetical in their symbolism. The Temple of Jupiter, dedicated in the


first year of the Republic, is associated with optimism and the promise of a

great future, while that of Claudius stands for a dream gone sour.

Omens and Exaggeration

Livy followed the practice of earlier annalists in listing omens at the

end of the chronicle for each year. Tacitus abandoned this tradition. His

approach was more fluid, positioning them strategically in the narrative to

heighten dramatic effect. In the context of the British rebellion, a list of

ominous portents is placed just before the veterans of Camulodunum are

massacred.69 The statue of Victory, symbolic of the Roman colony, fell

prostrate 'with its back turned as if in retreat from the enemy'. In the

Thames estuary a vision of the ruined colonia had been seen, and

Oceanus turned blood-red. The whole passage serves to increase

suspense and to foreshadow the disastrous events to come.70

Rhetoric has been defined as oratory reduced to a method. In

rhetorical composition, exaggeration was both permitted and expected.71

Tacitus, skilled in rhetorical technique,72 deliberately inflated the number

killed during the British revolt. The report that Boudica had killed 70,000

Roman citizens and allies was designed to shock. Accordingly, when the

forces of Suetonius Paulinus were said to have killed 80,000 Britons at a


cost to themselves of only 400 legionaries, the aim was to amplify their

success. Tacitus uses the same convention to describe Caledonian

losses at the Battle of Mons Graupius, where 10,000 Celts are killed

compared to a mere 360 Romans.73

Postponement of Information

Rhetorically, the presentation of events is aimed at effectiveness

rather than logical or chronological considerations. It has been noted that

Tacitus postponed certain information 'from the point where clarity

requires it to a later moment in the story, where it will score a rhetorical

point'.74 In the Agricola the account of the Boudican revolt, while

epitomized, is presented logically. Events proceed as follows: 1)

Suetonius Paulinus attacks Mona; 2) in his absence the Britons, under the

leadership of Boudica, secretly discuss their plans for insurrection; 3) the

rebellion takes place; 4) the Britons are defeated in a pitched battle. By

contrast, the Annals contain an example of rhetorical postponement. Only

after Camulodunum, Londinium and Verulamium have been destroyed

and the Ninth Legion has been mauled is the identity and gender of the

British leader revealed. Moreover, the revelation is disclosed obliquely, for

it is Boudica herself who makes the announcement. It is late in the

narrative, just prior to the final battle scene, which marks the climax of the


episode, when the reader is informed that a woman is in charge. The

purpose of this postponement is to add an element of surprise.

Speeches

Two invented speeches are included in the narrative of the British

revolt. They are rhetorical compositions whose content expresses the

sentiments of Tacitus. Boudica's address appears first,75 followed

immediately by that of Suetonius Paulinus, which leads us directly into the

climactic battle scene. Both are in direct speech (oratio recta), and are

deliberately short so as not to slow the pace. They follow the same

scheme as that found in the Agricola, where the speech of Calgacus is

followed by that of Agricola.76 They too are in oratio recta, but are

considerably longer, and are presented just before the climactic battle.

Suetonius Paulinus' speech is a simple exhortation to this troops. It

balances Boudica's delivery, but is insipid by comparison. Tacitus uses

the Boudican oration to make several points. It portrays her as the

avenger of a people who have suffered the ravages of Roman

imperialism. Then, as a reminder to the reader, her family's maltreatment

is alluded to. This is followed by an appeal to her warriors: 'conquer or

die'. Finally, we are reminded that it is a woman speaking. The speech


closes with: 'This is a woman's resolve, as for men, they may live and be

slaves'. In Latin, it ends with a masterful piece of alliteration, 'viverent viri

et servirent': a statement which echoes the sentiment and language of

Lucretia's declaration, 'si vos viri estis'.77

Syme maintained that speeches are often a clue to the writer's

closest preoccupations.78 In this respect, Boudica joins a chorus of

northern barbarians, like Arminius, Boiocalus, Calgacus, Civilis and

Caratacus, all of whom spoke out against Roman domination.79 Here we

are faced with a fundamental paradox. Tacitus lends significant rhetorical

force to the cause of barbarian freedom, but when their aspirations are

crushed, he delights in the victory of Roman arms. While he certainly

blamed Roman excesses for causing the British rebellion, and apparently

sympathized with Boudica's struggle, he revelled in the triumph of

Paulinus.

The soldiers spared not even the women, and the speared

baggage-animals were added to the pile of bodies. Great glory was

won that day, equal to the victories of old.80

The theme of barbarian political freedom is surely a device used by

Tacitus to provide an oblique commentary on the situation in Rome. The

political condition at the centre of the empire was always his foremost

consideration, and he noted with disapproval the servile and sycophantic

politicians who filled the senate. By contrast, the barbarian was willing to


fight and die for his liberty. In the abstract, Tacitus seemingly found this

an admirable quality. However, it is a mistake to conclude that he thought

Roman imperialism was wrong81 -- his father-in-law was one of its

champions -- nor did he see any great virtue in being a barbarian.

Undeniably, Tacitus idealizes certain aspects of barbarian society, but this

too was a medium through which an indirect criticism of Roman morality

could be made. The barbarians of Tacitus are second-hand.82 He

probably never saw the Germans or the Britons in their native habitats.

Their primitiveness was alien to Tacitus and antithetical to his refined

urbanitas.

THE BOUDICAN REVOLT IN ITS LITERARY SETTING

Book XIV of the Annals is a model of balance and symmetry. It is

widely acknowledged that the opening episode, describing the murder of

Nero's mother, Agrippina, is complemented by the closing account of the

murder of his wife, Octavia.83 These two 'domestic' events, set in the

vicinity of Rome, are balanced by two foreign and military episodes which

separate them. To emphasize this rhetorical antithesis, Tacitus chose

theatres of war that are at opposite ends of the empire: one in the East,

the other in the West. With only a brief interlude,84 the reader is

transported from Corbulo's campaign in Armenia to Paulinus' struggles


against the bellicose Britons. There is further polarization in the content of

the domestic and military episodes. The former is an expression of

corruption and depravity, the latter courage and martial glory.85 The four

main episodes of Book XIV, each the centrepiece of a different year, can

be expressed diagrammatically as follows.

A.D. 59 A.D.60 A.D.61 A.D.62

Murder of Agrippina

Corbulo in Armenia

Boudican Revolt Murder of Octavia

res internae domestic

res externae military

res externae military

res internae domestic

Rome Corruption

Foreign (East) Courage

Foreign (West) Courage

Rome Corruption

With Rome as the focus of attention, episodes such as the Boudican revolt

and Corbulo's campaigns served as interludes, and were deliberately

placed to provide both variety and relief from the political machinations of

the capital.

Tacitus exercised a good deal of flexibility within the annalistic

framework, ordering events to suit his needs within any one year.86 This

practice is most evident in the Claudian and Neronian books, where

military campaigns, covering several seasons, are grouped under a single

year's narrative. This is certainly the case in the chronicle of events

outlined in Book XII.31-40. Tacitus explicitly acknowledged his

compression of several years of British history (A.D. 47-58) in the record


of the consular year of Gaius Antistius and Marcus Suillius (A.D. 50). The

Boudican revolt (XIV.29-39) is a continuation of this account, with Aulus

Didius serving as the link between the two sections. Tacitus assigned the

entire Boudican episode to the consulate of Caesennius Paetus and

Petronius Turpilanus (A.D. 61). While a minority of scholars have no

quarrel with this date,87 the majority see difficulties in ascribing all the

recorded events to this single year. Syme, following Asbach, believed that

the rebellion actually began in A.D. 60.88 As a contribution to this debate it

is worth considering the dating of the rebellion in the context of the

structure of Book XIV. In view of Tacitus' concern with maintaining the

book's symmetry, it is not difficult to appreciate why Tacitus condensed

the British episode and ascribed it to A.D. 61. With this in mind, it is

attractive to assign the beginning of the revolt to A.D. 60.

Conclusion

Armed with the methodological tools for critical analysis, it is easy

for the modern scholar to see deficiencies in the work of ancient writers.

However, we can not expect histories written at the beginning of the first

millennium to conform to the conventions currently held at the beginning of

the third. It was unfair of Mommsen, when assessing Tacitus' account of

the Boudican rebellion, to brand him 'the most unmilitary of historians'.89 It


was never the intention of Tacitus to style himself the Lidell Hart of the

Trajanic Period. Certainly, he wanted his history to be interesting, which is

an understandable concern for any writer, and we have seen his mastery

of the techniques of literary embellishment to that end. Tacitus wanted to

be read, not simply because he desired to deliver a moral critique on the

Early Principate, but also because it was a means of securing posthumous

fame.90 This is the message conveyed in the closing lines of the Agricola

and in Pliny's letter to Tacitus.91 History not only has the power to

immortalize the dramatis personae, but also the author. It also commands

the power to judge. For Tacitus this was the first duty of history.92

Perhaps he never envisioned Mommsen's sort of rebuke, but he did

anticipate that we would censure the evils he described.


References

1. Published in 1934 with its sequel Claudius the God by Robert Graves, and adapted for television in 1976 by the BBC.

2.Tac., Ann. 4.32-3; echoed in 16.16.

3. Tac., Ann. 14.29-39. Discussed with archaeological evidence by D.R. Dudley and G. Webster, The Rebellion of Boudicca (1962) and G. Webster, Boudica: the British Revolt against Rome A.D. 60 (1978)

4. These tribes were known to Caesar BG 5.20-1: the Iceni in the form of Cenimagni, A.L.F. Rivet and C. Smith, The place-names of Roman Britain (1979), 373-74.

5. Tac., Ann. 14.31

6. Described by Suetonius, Calig. 44.2, as Britannorum rex.

7. R.P. Mack, The coinage of Ancient Britain (1975), 65-70.

8. Tac., Ann. 12.31.

9. See A.A. Barrett 'Claudius' British Victory Arch in Rome' Britannia 22 (1991), 1-20. Cassius Dio 60.21.4-5 stated that Claudius 'brought over to his side numerous tribes, some by treaty, others by force...and deprived the conquered of their arms. The Iceni were still armed in A.D. 47, so presumably only those who were subdued by force were disarmed.

10. Tac., Ann. 31

11. Cassius Dio 62.2.4

12. This is Roman practice: E. Champlin, Final Judgements: duty and emotion in Roman wills (1991:18). It has no bearing on the custom of Iron Age Britons. We know nothing of how they managed inheritance, but it does indicate how quickly their nobility adopted Roman fashion. The will of Prasutagus is paralleled by that of Agricola, who also named the emperor as co-heir with his wife and daughter: Agric. 43.4.

13. D.C. Braund, Rome and the Friendly King (1984), 129-164.

14. The photograph is entitled Defiant, and was reproduced with the kind

permission of Hawkeye1967 (Flickr).

15. Colonia Victricensis (Camulodunum, Colchester), CIL XIV.3955; Tac., Ann. 12.32

25 Tacitus and the Boudican Revolt 16. cf. Agric. 16 and Ann. 14.33

17. Dio denies Paulinus the luxury of choice, stating that he was compelled to fight due to shortage of supplies and the relentless pressure of his enemies.

18. R. McPake, 'A note on the cognomina of Legio XX', Britannia 12 (1981), 293-5

19. Agric. 5

20. Agric. 15-16

21. See also Agric. 31 where Calgacus refers to a woman who led the Brigantes to burn a colony. The reference is to Boudica and Camulodunum, but the Brigantes took no part in the uprising: R.M. Ogilvie and I. Richmond, Cornelii Taciti: De Vitae Agricolae (1967), 260.

22. Tac. Ann. 14.23-7

23. A commentarius Corbulonis is referred to in Ann. 15.16

24. The style employed in the description of the British revolt is discussed in N.P. Miller, 'Style and content in Tacitus', in T.A. Dorey (ed.) Tacitus (1969), 107-111 and R. Martin, Tacitus (1994), 218-219.

25. Plut. Vit. Caes. 23.2; Cassius Dio 39.50; Tac. Agric. 10; Verg. Ecl. 1.66

26. Tac. Ann. 14.30

27. N.J. Reed, 'The sources of Tacitus and Dio for the Boudican Revolt', Latomus 33 (1974), 927-28.

28. Black dress: Aesch. Eum. 374. The Fury, Allecto, is portrayed with hair entwined with snakes: Verg. Aen. 7.329, 347. She also carries a funeral torch: Aen. 7.337.

29. 12.861-7

30. Caes.,BG 6.16; Mela, 3.18; Cassius Dio, 62.7.3 luridly described the sacrifice of captives during the Boudican revolt in the sacred grove of Andate, a Celtic goddess, but this was apparently creative reconstruction: G.B. Townend, 'Some rhetorical battle pictures in Dio', Hermes 92 (1964), 468, n.2.

31. G. Krodel, 'Persecutions and toleration of Christianity until Hadrian', in S. Benko and J. O'Rourke (eds.), The Catacombs and the Colosseum (1971), 255; H. Last, 'Rome and the Druids' JRS 39 (1949), 1-5. Augustus prohibited Roman citizens from participating in religio druidarum; under Tiberius a senatorial decree against Druidism was passed; Druidism was abolished under Claudius: Suet., Claud. 25; Pliny, NH 30.4.13.

26 Tacitus and the Boudican Revolt 32. Tac., Ann. 14.22; cf. Dio's lurid account, 62.27.

33. Tacitus uses the word currus (Ann. 14.35), translated her as war-chariot; cf. his usage for 'wagon' plaustrum (Ann. 14.34) and vehiculum (Ann. 14.37). Terminology discussed by S. Piggott, The earliest wheeled transport (1983), 234 and A.L.F. Rivet, 'A note on scythed chariots', Antiq. 52 (1979), 130-132.

34. S. Smiles, The image of antiquity (1994), 164.

35. Caes., BG 4.34; Diod. Sic., 5.21.5

36. E.Hall, Inventing the barbarian (1989), 95, 202.

37. Florus, 1.21

38. Germ., 45.9

39. Ann., 3.33

40. Tac., Ann. 14.34; 14.36; Germ. 7-8.

41. J.F. Gardner, Women in Roman Law & Society (1986), 262-265

42. N.B. Kampen, 'Gender Theory in Roman Art' in D.E.E. Kleiner and S.B. Matheson (eds.), I Claudia: Women in Ancient Rome (1996), 14; D.E.E. Kleiner, 'Imperial Women as Patrons of the Arts in the Early Empire' Ibid, 28; M.R. Lefkowitz, 'Influential Women' in A. Cameron and A. Kuhrt (eds.) Images of Women in Antiquity (1983), 55

43. The shadowy Galatian, Onomaris, is a possible exception, but so little is known about her: D. Gera, Warrior Women: the Anonymous Tractatus De Mulieribus (1997), 10-11, 223.

44. Pol., 1269b 27

45. BG 6.19

46. Female chariot burial: R. Joffroy, L'oppidum de Vix (1960), 38; J. Keller, Das Fürstengrab von Reinheim (1955), 33; Boudica's burial: Dio, 62.12.6.

47. Caes., BG 1.3; 1.18

48. Tac., Hist. 3.45; Ann. 12.40.

49. Tac., Hist. 3.45 treats this as a love-affair. I. Richmond, 'Cartimandua', JRS 44 (1954), 43-53 more correctly interprets the marriage as politically expedient.

50. Pol. 1269b 34-5.

51. Tac., Ann. 14.11.

27 Tacitus and the Boudican Revolt 52. S. Pembroke, 'Women in charge', Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 30 (1967), 1-35.

53. F. Graf, 'Women, war and warlike divinities', ZPE 55 (1984), 245.

54. Ann. 14.35

55. The dynastic coinages of late pre-Roman Britain suggest that its society was patrilineal.

56. Besides Boudica, the only other Briton named is Prasutagus. We may see this as a conspicuous attempt not to clutter the narrative with unintelligible names: cf. Strabo, 3.3.7; 16.4.18; Pliny NH 3.28.

57. B. Walker, The Annals of Tacitus: a study in the writing of history (1952), 66-77.

58. R. Martin, op. cit. (n.23); cf. Livy, 1.41 and Tac., Ann. 1.5, 12.66-8.

59. Amazons are mentioned twice in the Annals: 3.61; 4.56.

60. See D. von Bothmer, Amazons in Greek Art (1957), 106-9.

61. L. Hardwick, 'Ancient Amazons - heroes, outsiders or women' G&R 37 (1990), 14-36; W.B. Tyrrell, Amazons: a study in Athenian mythmaking (1984), 55.

62. M.R. Lefkowitz, Women in Greek myth (1986), 20.

63. Livy, 1.58-60.

64. 1.59.1.

65. Livy, 2.7.4; cf. Florus, 1.3.1.

66. A.N. Sherwin-White, Racial prejudice in Imperial Rome (1967), 41-44.

67. Tac., Ann. 14.31.

68. 1.55.6.

69. Tac., Ann. 14.32.

70. See C.W. Mendell, Tacitus: the man and his work (1957), 50-63; 121-4.

71. Walker, op.cit. (n. 54).

72. Pliny, Ep. 2.11.17.

73. Tac., Agric. 37.6.

28 Tacitus and the Boudican Revolt 74. K. Wellesley, 'Tacitus as military historian', in T.A. Dorey (ed.), Tacitus (1969), 70-1.

75. Ann. 14.35.

76. Tac. Agric. 30-2.

77. Livy, 1.58.8.

78. R. Syme, Tacitus (1958), 320.

79. Arminius: Ann. 1.59; Boiocalus: Ann. 13.55-6; Calgacus: op.cit (n. 81); Civilis: Hist. 4.14, 4.17; Caratacus: Ann. 12.34.

80. Ann.14.37.

81. See Agric. 13 for a veiled criticism of Augustan and Tiberian policies toward Britain. 'Inaction does not preserve great empires: Ann. 15.1; cf. the defence of imperialism by Cerialis, Tac., Hist. 4.74; See also H.W. Benario, 'Tacitus' view of the empire and pax Romana' in ANRW, Principat II: Bd.33.5 (1991), 3332-3353.

82. T.A. Dorey, 'Agricola' and 'Germania' in T.A. Dorey (ed.), Tacitus (1969), 17 stated that one of the weaknesses of the Germania was that its subject matter was too remote from the personal experience of Tacitus, and that he was too detached from it to deliver his best writing.

83. R. Martin, 'Structure and interpretation in the Annals of Tacitus' in ANRW, Principat II: Bd.33.2 (1990), 1557.

84. 14.27-8.

85. See M. Morford, 'Tacitus' historical methods in the Neronian books of the Annals' in ANRW, Principat II: Bd.33.2 (1990), 1604-5, 1610-11.

86. J. Ginsburg, Tradition and theme in the Annals of Tacitus (1981).

87. A.R. Burn, 'Tacitus on Britain', in T.A. Dorey (ed.), Tacitus (1969), 60; K.K. Carroll, 'The date of Boudicca's revolt', Britannia 10 (1979), 197-202; J.C. Overbeck, 'Tacitus and Dio on Boudica's rebellion', AJPh 90 (1969), 144 suggests a later date, A.D. 61/62.

88. R. Syme, op.cit. (n. 83); J. Asbach, 'Quo Anno Britanni Boudicca duce a Nerone defecerint', in Analecta Historica et Epigraphica Latina (1878), 8-16.

89. T. Mommsen, R@mische Geschichte 5 (1904), 165, n.1; See M.M. Sage, 'Tacitus' historical works: a survey and appraisal' in ANRW, Principat II: Bd.33.2 (1990), 926-7.

90. T.J. Luce, 'Tacitus on history's highest function: praecipuum munus annalium'


in ANRW, Principat II: Bd.33.4 (1991), 2916-22.

91. Pliny, Ep. 9.14

92. Tac., Ann. 3.65.

tacitus and the boudican revolt

Documents