Ptolemy describes the region as being divided among several tribes, although I don't think he goes into much detail.
Could The Roman Empire have conquered all of the British isles, had it chosen to try?
- Thread starter Parmenion
- Start date
Sure they could have conquered if they really wanted. The Highlands are a pain, but Romans aren't above a bit of light genocide if necessary, which the later English weren't even keeping in mind the Sack of Berwick. But Brittania was a bit of a sink in the best of times. For whatever reason Romanization does not seem to have sunk in as deep as in other parts of the Empire even in the south of England far away from raiders. Another thing to mention is a decent chunk of those three legions would be deployed well away from Hadrian's wall essentially doing garrison duty. The instant those forces were pulled out things collapsed to a situation not all that different from when the Romans first came. I don't think the land of the Picts fundamentally changes this.
This is a really cool notion, but the thing is that the eastern empire area of the Byzantines was rich, and Britain was not. It can't really support a Roman administration on its own resources.
You'd need really active trade through the channel for *Britzantium* to tax or something.
Let's look at this another way.
We know that the Romans could theoretically have conquered the whole of Scotland.
They didn't. That was a choice.
What could motivate them to do something in the ATL that they couldn't be bothered with in the OTL?
In short, what good reason is there to change their minds. Invaders and interlopers? The wall was good enough.
So either there needs to be something valuable up there that emerges or develops or is discovered, which motivates the Romans to go up and take it over.
Or the threat has to shift dynamically, so that a wall is no longer sufficient.
We know that the Romans could theoretically have conquered the whole of Scotland.
They didn't. That was a choice.
What could motivate them to do something in the ATL that they couldn't be bothered with in the OTL?
In short, what good reason is there to change their minds. Invaders and interlopers? The wall was good enough.
So either there needs to be something valuable up there that emerges or develops or is discovered, which motivates the Romans to go up and take it over.
Or the threat has to shift dynamically, so that a wall is no longer sufficient.
Judgemental much? Who among us hasn't started a century long conflict in an attempt to claim the French throne?
Would stories of large amounts of gold that could just be scooped up by the handfuls work? I'm not suggesting that we go ASB and actually change the amount just the speculation/rumor that tons exists.
bguy
Donor
The wall really wasn't good enough though. That's why Rome had to keep 3 legions stationed in Britain until the 5th century.
And the potential benefit for conquering the whole island would be that if all of Britain is pacified then the Romans can permanently reduce the size of the garrison there. Having 5 or 6 legions in Britain for 10 years is worth it, if that means that for the next 300 years thereafter you only need a single legion on the island. Just consider what happened with the Romans in Spain. Augustus surged a very large force (something like 8 legions plus auxiliaries) into Spain at the beginning of his reign to try and complete the conquest of the Iberian Peninsula. It took 10 years of hard fighting, but at the end of that time the Iberian Peninsula was pacified, and the Romans were thereafter able to steadily draw down their presence there. (By the reign of Nero there was only a single legion still stationed in Spain.)
Unlike Germany or Syria I cannot see the threat shifting dynamically enough. In the case of the Germans there were migrations from farther east. In the case of Syria there was a switch to a more aggressive Persian empire.
In the case of Scotland though, yes the naives did get more aggressive, but they were only part of the problem. There were also the Irish and the German invaders. Taking over Scotland does nothing to block them.
There were Medieval gold and silver mines in Scotland so no need to go ASB. However, they are in the south so only a case for holding the Antonine Walls. The Highlands, Western Isles and the Orkneys would continue to be of no value to the Romans.
No evidence that the Romans would think "if we put two more legions in and conquer Scotland we can reduce the total number one in ten years time." Whilst it may have worked for Spain they could not necessarily assume that it would work for Scotland.
bguy
Donor
That was how almost all Roman conquests played out though. The Romans sent very large armies against the Carthaginians in the Third Punic War and against the Numidians in the Jugurthine War (and against the Numidians again in Caesar's civil war which saw Rome actually annex Numidia), but thereafter the Romans typically only kept a single legion in Africa Province. Ditto with Greece and Macedonia. The Romans fought four wars against the Macedonians, a war with the Spartans, a war with the Aetolians, and a war with the Achaeans, but after Greece and Macedonia were subdued, the Romans typically didn't even have a legion stationed in Greece or Macedonia during the Principate. There's also the case of Pontus. The Romans fought three separate wars against the Kingdom of Pontus under Mithridates (and Caesar would fight a fourth war against Mithridates' son), but by the Principate the Romans rarely kept a legion stationed in Bithynia-Pontus.
In each of those cases successfully conquest enabled the Romans to greatly reduce their military presence in the conquered regions, so why would the Romans think the process would play out any differently in Britain than it had in almost every other place they had conquered?
What about just rumors they exist in the caves of the Highlands or some other nonsense? "Great Underground Cities Made of
What about Purple dye?
Archaeologists find rare item worth more to Romans than its weight in gold
The lump, made from a mysterious purple substance, was unearthed at the site of an ancient Roman bathhouse.
www.newsweek.com
Are their snails in Scotland that could be used?
Because they would remember how Germany turned out. You can campaign there but not hold it. However, all it takes is some Emperor to think it is a good idea at the time and they try it.
Actually, there were attempts a conquering Modern Scotland. It's why the Antonine Wall existed after all.
Plantagenets: in 1337 In and out, 20 minute adventure!
Plantagenets: in 1453 cries eternally
Plantagenets: in 1337 In and out, 20 minute adventure!
Plantagenets: in 1453 cries eternally
Last edited: