Could The Roman Empire have conquered all of the British isles, had it chosen to try?
- Thread starter Parmenion
- Start date
How is this different from Plantagenet England constantly trying to conquer France?
Uniform as in without Hadrian's wall acting as a barrier, all of Britain becomes Romano-Celtic not just the areas South of it. Obviously an organised Roman defence ( which included ships, not just land forces ) is a lot tougher than individual tribes, just as happened OTL in the South.
They tried really hard and failed, so we already had the answer. Could a more genius emperor do it? Perhaps?
It is unlikely that the Romans would have deployed enough ships to affect the Irish raiding Scotland. After all unlike the Saxon Shore fleet there was no fleet covering Wales so why are they going to build one in Scotland?
As for land forces, the west coast is so rugged that ships can easily outmanaeuvre patrols or reli3f forces to garrisons.
In terms of their economies southern England was far richer that northern England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland because it had far better agriculture. The few gold, silver and tin mines are insignificant compared with farming. That is why the Romans did not bother with Ireland or try to hold Scotland.
And why was there no fleet? Because the threat was not seen as large enough. It the Irish raids are big enough to bother, then the Roman counter is an Irish Shore. Not to mention lots of punitive actions till the Irish get the message ( the meme of the Roman idea of defence being to attack is an over simplification but still rooted in fact ). Unlike the Saxons the Irish are handily in range for an ambitious Roman General to gain glory by annexing ( officially more likely just paying lip service and tribute ) at least Ulster.
There is also all those islands for Irish/Scotti raiders to use as bases for hitting the mainland.
It is going to cost a fortune in gold to secure a Roman Scotland. There were 10,000 auxilaries on Hadrian's Wall and most of them were apparently moved to the Antonine Wall when that was in use. That leaves half of Scotland outside Roman control. I would hate to guess how many auxilaries would have to deployed there to control it. That could easily be another 10,0000 men. Some of whcih could go up into the mountains and never return.
That will not stop Irish/Scotti raiders so I guess we wave a wand to add a fleet with say 7,000 men (https://www.roman-britain.co.uk/military/military-units-of-roman-britain/classis/).
And once Scotland has been subdued, to meet the title of this thread there is still Ireland.
Yep. Raise up another legion and navy and go conquer Ireland.
Then more legions and a bigger navy and conquer Norway.
Three hundred years later - Okay, once we conquer Tibet, we're done!
I could see one of the post Claudian emperors decide that they wanted to be known as a conqueror and launching an invasion of the rest of Britainia, it would not be as major a risk, nor as expensive, as an invasion of some other neighboring territories like Parthia or Dacia so may be seen as a cheap way of improving his prestige. And of course after the conquest he and his successors would likely invest in pacifying the region further and romanizing it as much as possible, this would probably be mostly limited to the areas of southern Britain itself and maybe parts of Ireland but the rest of the country, much of Ireland, northern England, Wales, and Scotland, would probably not be as heavily Romanized at least at first.
If this happens early enough, say emperor Domitian conquers the British isles during his reign, you would have several centuries for the region to be culturally assimilated into the wider Roman empire, local language and custom would likely prevail in the countryside, but you would likely get a more urbanized and wealthy city culture develop as well. This more Romanized territory could prove valuable as a largely secure source of manpower and resources for the empire as things began to worsen for them on the continent, though on the other hand you may see generals like Maximus IOTL use their control over Britain as a springboard for their attempt to take the imperial throne.
In a best case scenario the islands may become the final redoubt of the western empire, with barbarian tribes overrunning its continental possessions emperors retreat into the only safe part of their territory, and that could lead to all manner of interesting butterflies if great Britain and Ireland become this bizarre western Roman empire bastion claiming legitimacy but lacking much ability to do anything about it.
If this happens early enough, say emperor Domitian conquers the British isles during his reign, you would have several centuries for the region to be culturally assimilated into the wider Roman empire, local language and custom would likely prevail in the countryside, but you would likely get a more urbanized and wealthy city culture develop as well. This more Romanized territory could prove valuable as a largely secure source of manpower and resources for the empire as things began to worsen for them on the continent, though on the other hand you may see generals like Maximus IOTL use their control over Britain as a springboard for their attempt to take the imperial throne.
In a best case scenario the islands may become the final redoubt of the western empire, with barbarian tribes overrunning its continental possessions emperors retreat into the only safe part of their territory, and that could lead to all manner of interesting butterflies if great Britain and Ireland become this bizarre western Roman empire bastion claiming legitimacy but lacking much ability to do anything about it.
Assuming that Rome conquered the whole of Scotland, I guess I'm puzzled by the notion that this would solve everyone's problems.
In OTL the people of the region were notoriously unruly, the terrain was poor, the weather crap, and I'm not sure how productive subsistence agriculture was up there. The tribes warred with each other constantly.
So assuming that Rome managed to conquer all the way up, most likely in part by negotiating deals and arrangements with feuding tribes. I don't know that Romanization would take, or that you'd see towns emerging or infrastructure being built. Most likely, it would be a worthless constantly squabbling backwater.
Would there be more security for the lower reaches - What's now England, Wales and southern Scotland? I don't know
But hell, let's take a look.
In OTL the people of the region were notoriously unruly, the terrain was poor, the weather crap, and I'm not sure how productive subsistence agriculture was up there. The tribes warred with each other constantly.
So assuming that Rome managed to conquer all the way up, most likely in part by negotiating deals and arrangements with feuding tribes. I don't know that Romanization would take, or that you'd see towns emerging or infrastructure being built. Most likely, it would be a worthless constantly squabbling backwater.
Would there be more security for the lower reaches - What's now England, Wales and southern Scotland? I don't know
But hell, let's take a look.
Unlike the Romans the Medieval English conquered virtually all of Scotland yet they could not hold it for very long. Why? Because the hilly redoubts are too big to control without puttng hundreds of troops into them and they could not afford the supercastles to buy time.
You might be able to Romanise the Glasgow Edinburgh area, but the equivalent of Inverness, Aberdeen, Ayr, etc will be effectively isolated. To Romanise them without a significant hinterland is impossible.
Worthless constantly squabbling backwater? A bit harsh, but would be true. Look at OTL Middle Ages to see why.
The English failed because there was already enough political unity in the region to sustain an effective resistance movement. That isn't so much the case in the Roman period.
Sorry if I was a bit mean there. But from the Roman point of view, what value is up there to obtain, except the illusion of peace and quiet.
What do we really know of the tribal structures up there in the Roman period?
As far as I know, the only sources are the Romans who were going "F*** that shit! Nope! Nope! Nope!"
Last edited: