Germania: the Nation that Defeated Rome

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

Germania wasn't a primary target for the Romans. They never cared enough about this poor underdeveloped land to make an effort similar to what they invested into (trying) to conquer Persia. The defeat incflicted by Arminius and his allys pales in comparison to what the Romans send to and lost on the Persian front.

Just because people allways repeat the same sentence it doesn't become true. It is one thing to say something, but another when the acting of the protagonists stand against the statement. People gave a lot good examples why the sentence about worthless land is nonsense and that the roman had clear intentions to occupy it.

[SorelusImperion]

A huge area without any urban infrastructure whatsoever, no know precious metals, no important trade routes. That's Germania for you as much as the Romans at the time knew it. What in there is worth a full military occupation ? Because that's the only thing Teutoburg forrest made clear: Germania was not going to fall without a fight and it would require a lengthy full fledged campaign to turn it into a somewhat stable province.
The tribes usually kept losing against the Roman military machine (till the very end!) but still the Romans did not make any renewed attempt to turn Germania into a province, it was fully sufficient to turn a few key tribes into loyal vassals/allies and so the Romans did which actually very much coincided with late Augustean policy of consolidating the Empire instead of expanding it. In the aftermath Germania was effectively turned a patchwork of client "states" and independent tribes and with the Parthians and the Sassanids knocking on the door every now and then there were far more important issues than adding a piss poor underdeveloped province to an Empire that was already burdened by it's sheer size.

But if you absolutely insist on the Germanic responsibility for stopping the Romans I'll formulate it this way: The Germanic tribes stopped the Romans by beeing to poor to be worth beeing conquered.

[Cyclops]

Thats not entirely fair Sorelusimperion, Germania sat athwart the Baltic amber trade routes, and was a source of slaves and fighting men for the legions. It had strategic value in that it was a source of raiders too (on top of the perhaps unrealised value of shortening the Imperial border overall, had it been occupied to the Vistula), and the Romans did seek to occupy threatening positions over the border when they proved a threat to established provinces (such as Britain, Dacia, Further Spain etc etc, the process of Roman expansion was in part a graduated series of responses to new neighbours).

Its certainly true Germania was not crying out to be conquered (especially once the Monarchy stymied the lust for wealth and glory generated by the cursus honorum) and typically occupied a position as second or third front in Roman military and strategic thought. This is reflected in the concentration of legions in Egypt and Syria and the shift of the centre of Imperial gravity eastwards to New Rome. Tellingly though the real push to conquer Germania was made by Augustus: was he rashly seeking a bit of extra glory or was it a realistic objective? The campaign was concluded in less than a decade IIRC, cf the centiuries spect pacifying Spain.

The process of divide and conquer certainly sufficed to keep the Germans in check for three centuries after Rome first acquired a common border, and the Western Empire fell because of internally inflicted economic damage, compounded by the shock waves emanating from the steppes . The Germans were just the hyenas chewing on the carcass, although they had remained unconquered long enough to enjoy the feast which is a fine efffort.

My Irish ancestors likewise "defied" Rome, although they were more remotely situated and poorer even than Germania. There are silly claims like "the Irish saved civilisation" etc because they had some isolated monasteries and brwavely converted some Germanic heathens.

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

A huge area without any urban infrastructure whatsoever, no know precious metals, no important trade routes. That's Germania for you as much as the Romans at the time knew it. What in there is worth a full military occupation ? Because that's the only thing Teutoburg forrest made clear: Germania was not going to fall without a fight and it would require a lengthy full fledged campaign to turn it into a somewhat stable province.
The tribes usually kept losing against the Roman military machine (till the very end!) but still the Romans did not make any renewed attempt to turn Germania into a province, it was fully sufficient to turn a few key tribes into loyal vassals/allies and so the Romans did which actually very much coincided with late Augustean policy of consolidating the Empire instead of expanding it. In the aftermath Germania was effectively turned a patchwork of client "states" and independent tribes and with the Parthians and the Sassanids knocking on the door every now and then there were far more important issues than adding a piss poor underdeveloped province to an Empire that was already burdened by it's sheer size.

But if you absolutely insist on the Germanic responsibility for stopping the Romans I'll formulate it this way: The Germanic tribes stopped the Romans by beeing to poor to be worth beeing conquered.

First, as i mentioned many times before. Parthia was not a threat to the realm, specially in the time between Augustus and Traian. The never showed interest in Expand in to the Roman Empire. The trouble they had with Parthia, was because Romans thought they could conquer it and failed. The largest number of Legions which were stationed over a longer time are on the Rhine and the Danube.

You seems not much to know about Middle/Northern Europe 2000 years ago. There were many traderoutes, the amberroute is just the most famous one. There were international traderoutes all across the country since the Bronce-Time, long before the Romans arrived and that the Germans only had villages is also entirely wrong. They had Hillcastles/cities with a maximum number of 2000 inhabitants and specially in the regions near the baltic sea real cities. One reason why the most people don't know about it is because they don't know the sources from other culture areas and languages. In this case it would be German, Polish, Czech and the Scandinavian languages. I know this because i do research on the Parthians for a longer time and pretty much no-one in the western science is aware of the great russian and turkmenistan research about the Parthians.

In case of Germany i can provide you this 2 pages article about the look of ancient Germania beyond the roman borders. It is from a German Magazin but fortunatly it is all in english

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-720513.html

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Parthia was a pushover nation, their fueldal-like system made it impossible for them to effectively unite. The sassanids were the only true threat to the Roman Empire. Even the Western empire wasn't really threatened until the 460's by the Germanics.

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

Parthia was a pushover nation, their fueldal-like system made it impossible for them to effectively unite. The sassanids were the only true threat to the Roman Empire. Even the Western empire wasn't really threatened until the 460's by the Germanics.

The Parthians had the same "feudal" system than the old Persians. People allways forget that they had really diffrent problems than care about expand in to the west. The Parthians saved Europe for centuries without european realms knowing it. They constantly fought against mighty Steppe Empires, the same way the Persians did. I think it is a mistake allways to assume that people which don't try to expand are weak. The Parthians had a strong Empire, all the time they had just one Dynasty, but they were not very expansive after conquering the former Persian Realm. Roman Propaganda (there is plenty of research on this subject) had a programm against the Parthians and Eastern people after Carrhae and declared them as weak people. Diplomaty was very important for the Parthians, for the Romans less, still Augustus celebrated the return of Crassus Eagles as a Victory, which is was not.

[athanaric]

Parthia was a pushover nation, their fueldal-like system made it impossible for them to effectively unite. The sassanids were the only true threat to the Roman Empire. Even the Western empire wasn't really threatened until the 460's by the Germanics.

If they'd been a "pushover nation", they wouldn't have been in charge for several centuries, let alone defied so many enemies.

[SorelusImperion]

You seems not much to know about Middle/Northern Europe 2000 years ago. There were many traderoutes, the amberroute is just the most famous one. There were international traderoutes all across the country since the Bronce-Time, long before the Romans arrived and that the Germans only had villages is also entirely wrong. They had Hillcastles/cities with a maximum number of 2000 inhabitants and specially in the regions near the baltic sea real cities.

I seriously hope you are not going to trust an Egypt who has never been to Germania when looking for evidence of Germanic urban developement. It has been common practice to fill up unknown areas with invented places. And while Ptolemy might have had knowledge about some germanic settlements through second hand sources it's unlikely that they were precise enough to make any sort of conclusions
about their size. What we have got however is archeological evidence and that pinpoints us to a much lower urban and economical level of developement in Germania when compared to Gaul, Italy, or the famously wealthy east which the Romans kept trying to conquer and defend.

And while the amber route was of some importance it was no route that could be easily controled to gain wealth due to the lack of infrastructure. What the Romans could possibly get out of it they already got by virtue of controling the Danube. Not to mention the Germanic parts of it lay far beyond the borders Roman "Germania Magna".

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

I seriously hope you are not going to trust an Egypt who has never been to Germania when looking for evidence of Germanic urban developement. It has been common practice to fill up unknown areas with invented places. And while Ptolemy might have had knowledge about some germanic settlements through second hand sources it's unlikely that they were precise enough to make any sort of conclusions
about their size. What we have got however is archeological evidence and that pinpoints us to a much lower urban and economical level of developement in Germania when compared to Gaul, Italy, or the famously wealthy east which the Romans kept trying to conquer and defend.

And while the amber route was of some importance it was no route that could be easily controled to gain wealth due to the lack of infrastructure. What the Romans could possibly get out of it they already got by virtue of controling the Danube. Not to mention the Germanic parts of it lay far beyond the borders Roman "Germania Magna".

The surprising fact is that diggings in modern day Brandenburg support the map in many ways. In the last 5 years archaeologists find more treasures than they ever expected.

If you look in this interactive map which only show a few typed of amphores and ceramic and that they were find in giant number in the region of Brandenburg, Pommern and Poland than you would have maybe a diffrent opinion.

[SorelusImperion]

3rd Century as you might have read. By this time Arminius had been long gone and Rome had entered into a crisis that had nothing to to with Germanic tribes and all with the rise of the Sassanids. Obviously Germania didn't remain just as poor and underdeveloped as it had been in the 1st century and By the 4th century the political landscape had changed as well with the rise of larger and more stable tribal alliances/federations. All this hower has little to do with the end of large expansionist campaigns by the Romans. You must realize that their Empire had reached a size were communications and logistics were far greater problems than enemy powers that's why they had to split it into two largely autonomous units and started moving the capital closer to the border.

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

3rd Century as you might have read. By this time Arminius had been long gone and Rome had entered into a crisis that had nothing to to with Germanic tribes and all with the rise of the Sassanids. Obviously Germania didn't remain just as poor and underdeveloped as it had been in the 1st century and By the 4th century the political landscape had changed as well with the rise of larger and more stable tribal alliances/federations. All this hower has little to do with the end of large expansionist campaigns by the Romans. You must realize that their Empire had reached a size were communications and logistics were far greater problems than enemy powers that's why they had to split it into two largely autonomous units and started moving the capital closer to the border.

I was not writting about the 3th century crisis. Actually i was writting about the time until 200 AD. The map i linked show that there was a huge exchange of roman Pottery and Germanic good in to the region these tribe and culture lived.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lugii

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Przeworsk_culture

The time you speak of the roman economy broke together and the main pottery types of Dressel (21/22,24?) were no longer produces and there were also no new types. If people speak about the Germanic People than they often thing only about the ununified tribes in the west, but completly forget that the Marcomanni had a larger realm, with cities in Bohemia and also in the baltic area. They were not metropoles like in the mediterran world but similar to the celtic oppida.

How rich some germans were you can see in the Fürstengrab of Gommern for example.

Link to the musseum with many, many pictures of artifacts:
http://www.landschaftsmuseum.de/Seit...ab_Gommern.htm (dated around 250 AD).

[SorelusImperion]

The Przeworsk^[1] culture is part of an Iron Age archaeological complex that dates from the 2nd century BC to the 5th century AD.

That's one century after Arminus already.

Some burials are exceptionally rich, overshadowing the graves of Germanic groups further west, especially after 400 AD.^[6] Pottery and metalwork are often rich and show a great variety

More evidence to support my argument that it took centuries of developement, plundering and trade to bring at least the Elites up to a certain standard of wealth which was still low enough to make raiding the Empire or settling within it desirable.

http://www.landschaftsmuseum.de/Seit...ab_Gommern.htm (dated around 250 AD).

Focus on the bold part. That's mid 3rd century for you. Nothing to do with Arminius and stopping the Romans anymore.


For the times of Arminius you are looking at the Jasdorf Culture and it's transition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jastorf_Culture

Finds are mostly from tumuli, flat graves and Brandgruben graves. There are few and modest grave goods, with the weapon deposits characteristic of migration period graves completely absent.

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

Focus on the bold part. That's mid 3rd century for you. Nothing to do with Arminius and stopping the Romans anymore.

But the rest was earlier. Still the man in the grave could have been one of the man fighting the Romans at the Harzhorn, which forced them to retreat.

That's one century after Arminus already.

No it is not. You have mistaken BC with AD. Actually the culture started 200 Years before Arminius. Also what is wrong to gain wealth by raiding and trading? How do you think the Romans became rich? Specially the raiding is for the eastern baltic region more unlikly because they wouldn't have gone to the border of the Roman Empire. If they get their richdome by raid than from Roman allied tribes.

Edit: It would be nice if when people use multiqoute that at least once the name of the quoted person appears. I for example don't know who wrote the strange sentece saxdude quoted below me.

[saxdude]

When the elite language conferes status as well as giving access to amazing tech, culture and resources there's a good reason for adoption. The tech/social organisation gap between Aztecs etc and Spaniards was colossal, those guys were stone age.

I don't want to change subject or anything, but it would be super duper if massive statements like this were avoided, especially if you know little on the subject.

Don't be rude sax, dont be rude.

[SorelusImperion]

But the rest was earlier. Still the man in the grave could have been one of the man fighting the Romans at the Harzhorn, which forced them to retreat.

Crisis of the third century + Previous decisions = No intent to conquer Germania. The Romans kept winning most battles but they simply didn't want to waste resources on a full scale occupation of a still relatively poor and large area when there were far more pressing concerns like civil wars or the need to reform the Empire when it split into three.
.

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

Crisis of the third century + Previous decisions = No intent to conquer Germania. The Romans kept winning most battles but they simply didn't want to waste resources on a full scale occupation of a still relatively poor and large area when there were far more pressing concerns like civil wars or the need to reform the Empire when it split into three.

But this would be the time of the Grave and the Grave has is extremly rich. How could the region by poor at this time? That is not a very logical argumentation. And how you claim that the romans still won the most of the battles? We know just of the one and that was just a partially victory, resulting in a final retreat with giving up the baggage. Maybe there is reason why the campaign is not documented in the sources. Besides that there were no regular Roman Forces on the Germanic Borders anymore. The Limes was no longer and any civil settlement east of the rhine was left.

But coming back to the time of Arminius. The Jasdorf culture endet in this time, while the other east germanian culture which was also the one of the Marcomanni Realm was allready 200 years there and also gone hundrets of years more. The culture and developmend in the Baltic area was also much further than in the more continental parts of Germania, which had the same reasons like on the mediterran coasts.

[SorelusImperion]

But this would be the time of the Grave and the Grave has is extremly rich. How could the region by poor at this time?

A princly grave. Please read your sources. Now why are the Germanic tribes leaders rich ? Because they got gold from the Romans.
Subsidies, Raids or simple payment for serving in the Roman military brought quite a lot of wealth into Germania but it was concentrated largely within the hands of a few and this in turn lead to concentration of political power as well.

Maybe there is reason why the campaign is not documented in the sources

Propaganda obviously. Romans weren't so keen on reporting battles unless they were victorious. But the obvious evidence in front of us is a relatively stable Roman border in the North and the ability of the Romans meddle so much within the tribal network.

Besides that there were no regular Roman Forces on the Germanic Borders anymore. The Limes was no longer and any civil settlement east of the rhine was left

What ??!?!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limes_G..._the_Antonines
Nearly all of Baden-Würtemberg remained in Roman hands for strategical purposes until the abandonment of the Raetian Limes in the 3rd century.
You know the Roman city of Aquae ? Baden Baden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baden-Baden
Romans and their military encampments remained all over the places they considered important enough to merit a continual military presence.

To suggest that the Romans abandoned the Germanic Limes is absurd. Quite to the contrary due to the developements in Germania and the beginning formation of stronger tribal federations amongst them beeing the Marcomanni the Romans strengthened the Germanic Limes and it remained a militarily defended border till the 5th century.

Jasdorf culture endet in this time

It didn't "end" it entered a transition phase and Arminius' tribesmen were still largely part of that Jasdorf culture. Only in the 2nd century it had finally changed into something noticeably different.

The culture and developmend in the Baltic area was also much further than in the more continental parts of Germania

Obviously. But the Romans never got as far and imagining the huge distances and horrible infrastructure in between it's hard to imagine how they could get there without neglecting more important regions closer at home.

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

I wrote in the context of the grave dated around 250 AD which fill in the 3th century crisis and the battle at the Harzhorn. In this time, even the wiki article told so, the Limes was gone and the right-Rhine regions had no civil settlements any longer. In the same time the western-Rhine cities started to build city walls the first time. Legionary camps only had a tower occupied at this time, the rest was gone, the tower of the limes weren't occupied any longer.

[SorelusImperion]

I wrote in the context of the grave dated around 250 AD which fill in the 3th century crisis and the battle at the Harzhorn.

So ? The Romans neglected the Limes for some time because of the ongoing civil wars and the Sassanid threat. That hardly supports anthing regarding your position on the supposed economic developement of Germania during Arminius era or their military capabilities. Rather it shows that even in times of crisis the Roman Empire felt strong enough to try campaigns in deep Germania. Which doesn't nessecarily meant that these campaigns ended with a glorious roman triumph. It was probably a quite mixed bag but gradual the stabilization of the overall situation supports that the Romans were militarily sucessfull despite the pressure exerted by the Sassanids whose ascendance was a major if not THE major factor in perpetuating the crisis.

[Erebus Pasha]

I'd be interested to know why you think the Sassanids were the major factor in perpetuating the third century crisis rather than simply being a contributing factor? The only time when the Sassanids were a real handful was during the 250's (the reigns of Gallus and Valerian in particular) and that was only because Rome was pre-occupied with internal conflict, the plague and problems on other frontiers (the Danube and Anatolia). Shapur thought highly of himself for playing a part in the downfall of two emperors but generally how many of his campaigns can ultimately regarded as being complete military successes? He didn't actually gain that much out of a peace treaty with Philip who was eager to cement his position in the capital(after the death of Gordian), and despite capturing Valerian and ravaging Syria and parts of South-Eastern Anatolia he was defeated by the Macriani and Odenathus of Palmyra in the early 260's.

On the other hand the tribes on the Rhine and Danube frontiers were a real concern, particularly between the reigns of Decius and Aurelian. It was the perceived failure of emperors to deal effectively with barbarian tribes by those living and working on the aforementioned frontiers that contributed to the many usurpers that rose up during the period. Peoples such as the Alemanni proved a direct threat to Rome's core provinces and came close to taking the capital in 259(according to Zonaras), whilst the Goths and other associated tribes overran Thrace and Greece(whilst also raiding the Aegean and Anatolia) in the late 260's. It took a lot of hard slogging for emperors like Gallienus, Claudius Gothicus and Aurelian to restore the situation and even then concessions had to be made.