# Fact or Fiction



## Rosemary (Oct 4, 2005)

Was Boudicca/Boudicea a real person or just a legend?  From the many history books that I have read, it would be a true let down to find out that she was as only a legend.   

I shall be watching this TV special with interest, laptop at the ready!


----------



## nixie (Oct 4, 2005)

Boudecia,was real,


----------



## Rosemary (Oct 5, 2005)

Well I always thought so as well, Nixie.  

So what reasons will the documentary come up with to prove that she was in fact, just a legend?  It will have to be a very convincing reason for me.


----------



## nixie (Oct 5, 2005)

Boudecia was a tribal leader who fought the Romans, she rose up against them after a some sort of betrayal which led to the rape of her daughters and the slaughter of her people.I'm a bit hazy on details but I do remember that she managed to put the Romans in retreat for awhile.There is also written evidence that she did exist.There is a lot of myth surronding her but she was a real person


----------



## Arkangel (Oct 5, 2005)

All i have read or heard of this queen who revolted against the roman empire are theories and stories. there are rumors about written documents of her existences but none have been yet publicly acknowledged. 

There is nice info on Boudicca/Boudicea on this site http://members.tripod.com/~ancient_history/boad.html most of it you probably will already know but it is still cool. If you do find some good hard evidence please do let me know.

I am very much interested to know about this legendary queen who deified the Roman Empire.


----------



## Brys (Oct 5, 2005)

Bouddica was a real person and the Bouddica revolts are written of by Roman historians I think.



> legendary queen who deified the Roman Empire


 
I think you mean queen who "defied" the Roman Empire - she wasn't trying to make gods out of them.


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Oct 5, 2005)

Not sure what you mean by publicly acknowledged, but I've always understood that Tacitus and Dio Cassius were considered fairly reliable sources.


----------



## Arkangel (Oct 5, 2005)

Brys said:
			
		

> Bouddica was a real person and the Bouddica revolts are written of by Roman historians I think.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you mean queen who "defied" the Roman Empire - she wasn't trying to make gods out of them.


that is what i meant. but so much posting and typing I over looked to check my spelling. Thanks for correcting me.

Well the Roman Empire was a mighty strong empire at that time. All that was written about her were mostly things they heard from others. I do like to believe she was a real person but her stories do not add up. So many versions. Some say she revolted because her daugthers were raped. Some say it was because the romans attacked her land after the death of her husband. There are other version which i cannot write now but all these cant be true.

I do know a little about Tactius but i am not aware about the other person. I have to admit i am no great historian. All i have said is just my perception of things that happened at that time in history and so many versions of that. If they are good sources then i have nothing to argue but agree until i can come up with something else. But thanks for letting me know.


----------



## nixie (Oct 5, 2005)

As I said earlier I'm a bit hazy on detail but from what I remember there was a truce that the Romans violated by raping her daughters,ceasing lands and generally slaughtering her people.As far as the Britons were concerned the Romans were the invaders.Boudicia's revolt didn't last long but while it lasted she managed to cause them a lot of damage.This was a part of history I covered in primary school.Legends have been born from this tribal queen,but unlike King Arthur, Robin Hood etc she is not a myth but a real person.


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Oct 5, 2005)

What you are calling different versions, Arkangel, are merely different details of the same story.  The Romans attacked her people, seized her lands, AND raped her daughters.  Why would you think all of those things couldn't be true at the same time?


----------



## Arkangel (Oct 5, 2005)

Kelpie said:
			
		

> What you are calling different versions, Arkangel, are merely different details of the same story. The Romans attacked her people, seized her lands, AND raped her daughters. Why would you think all of those things couldn't be true at the same time?


Well for one, the places i gathered these info from. Either my sources are wrong or my interpertations of it are wrong. I do have to accept what you are saying is true. But i do not understand why do some historians still debate on this issue. If she was a real person then why the debate. 

I am at loss has to which sites, blogs, articles or books that convinced me to believe that she is not a real person. It has been a long time since i have discussed on this topic. My memories are rusty.


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Oct 5, 2005)

I don't think historians do debate her authenticity.  I'll bet the TV program that Rosemary is talking about doesn't even debate her authenticity -- they're probably just trying to draw viewers in by hinting at a controversy that doesn't exist.  

Certainly there are _details_ of her life that are open to debate, like whether Boudicca was really her given name or one that people bestowed on her during the rebellion.  Perhaps a vague memory of some such discussion lingers in your mind.


----------



## Arkangel (Oct 6, 2005)

Kelpie said:
			
		

> I don't think historians do debate her authenticity. I'll bet the TV program that Rosemary is talking about doesn't even debate her authenticity -- they're probably just trying to draw viewers in by hinting at a controversy that doesn't exist.
> 
> Certainly there are _details_ of her life that are open to debate, like whether Boudicca was really her given name or one that people bestowed on her during the rebellion. Perhaps a vague memory of some such discussion lingers in your mind.


it has been over a year since i last read about Boudicca, my interest in her was due to my desire to learing everything about the Roman empire. I came across this debate in a forum over a year a ago. So my memories are hazy about this issue.


----------



## Rosemary (Oct 7, 2005)

I watched the documentary last night.  All of the facts, as I know them have been proved correct.  In all of my research into ancient British history, I have never come across any proven evidence to say that she was just a legend.  Her real name was pronounced Bodica, so not a name bestowed upon her during her battles or after her death.  And her revolt against the Romans was certainly well recorded by the Roman invaders, particularly the last battle.

The only uncertainty that the documentary pointed out was - did she poison herself after the Romans had won that last battle or did she die from her wounds?  The other unproven fact is still, where is she buried?  The rumours still going around, are that she is buried in London, neither proved or disproved.

During Queen Victoria's reign, Boudicca/Boudicea was quite revered, seen as the embodiment of 'Britania'.  Her bronze statue, which although very striking is of course not correct in its details.  The blades in the wheels would not have been there, the rearing horses would have been much smaller and the chariot itself made of wicker.  All of which has been known for a very long time by historians.  Despite that the statue is still one of Britains great monuments, a monument to a truly amazing figure in British history.


----------

