Apparently, at the start of his reign, Nero “even considered withdrawing from Britain, and only refrained from doing so out of deference” (Suetonius, Nero 18). Explain what prompted such a pessimistic view of the situation in Britain and why the imperial authorities decided to accelerate the pace of expansion rather than pull out altogether.
This essay asks you to discuss why Britain remained on the Roman agenda despite the rather disappointing material gains that the Claudian invasion had produced. Why didn’t the empire simply wash its hands of the place? What benefits (material and otherwise) accrued from the seizure and subsequent retention of the province? How fair is the proposition that Britain was an economic ‘lame-duck’, in any event? These questions (and others!) will need to be assessed by you in the construction of the essay. The following books may be of assistance to supplement the material in your course texts and class notes. This should be an argument based on evidence. DO NOT give me a chronological narrative!!
*Braund, D. 1996. Ruling Roman Britain. 10-23; 41-54; 76-112
*Frere, S. 1987. Britannia.
*Salway, P. 1981. Roman Britain. 615-664.
*Salway, P. 2002. The Roman Era. 173-230
We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism.