Spartacus’s battle with the Romans

Both the reading and the lecture discuss the story of Spartacus’s battle with the Romans. The reading considers Spartacus as a hero for three reasons, but the lecturer argues against the reasons by giving refutations. First, the article indicates that Spartacus’s goal was to return to his homeland. Yet, the scholar states that returning home was not the only goal for Spartacus. Spartacus once could escape from the Romans, nonetheless, he did not take the opportunity. He marched toward the city in order to conquer the Romans and take as much as he could. Therefore, revenge and wealth might also be the goal of Spartacus. Secondly, the passage suggests that Sparctus is admired due to his initial win, but the professor opposites the theory. The professor implies that the initial success was because the Romans did not take Spartacus seriously, they sent poorly-trained soldiers and bad equipment. However, when the Romans sent their best soldiers, Spartacus was quickly defeated. In other words, Spartacus was not a brilliant military leader. Third, the paragraph believes that Spartacus liberated all Roman slaves. Once again, the speaker casts doubt and contends that this theory is not based on history, in contrast, it was created by a playwriter in the 18th century. At that time, the movement of anti-slavery was conducted, and people needed an ancient character as an inspirational hero to promote. Consequently, the theory originated from the story in the play, instead of the historical truth. In conclusion, the lecturer severely challenges all the reasons provided in the reading. That is to say, the lecturer holds the belief that Spartacus was not an appealing hero.