Was it economical for Rome to conquer Germania?

[crazyorc]

In my view, Germania at that time was too poor to maintain a vast of legions, so perhaps it was good for Rome to lose in the Teutonburg forest. Afterward, Rome didnt need to waste resources to defend that poor land.

[hellheaven1987]

Perhaps, but I highly doubt that since Roman, after Teutoburg Forest, still tried to conquer Germania (see Germanicus). Also, economical factor alone could not explain the reasons behind, especially cases like Britainnia where was not much better than Germania when Roman conquered it but two centuries of development after the conquest proved the provinces could be properly developed if putting effort.

[gaius valerius]

Perhaps, but I highly doubt that since Roman, after Teutoburg Forest, still tried to conquer Germania (see Germanicus). Also, economical factor alone could not explain the reasons behind, especially cases like Britainnia where was not much better than Germania when Roman conquered it but two centuries of development after the conquest proved the provinces could be properly developed if putting effort.

The campaigns of Germanicus were more of punitive raids. Germany was more developped then the Romans thought, for example Caesar said Germany had about no agriculture, hence no reason to there, but he was simply wrong, there was a lot of agriculture in the German lands. Had the Romans been able to succesfully occupy and subjugate Germany up until the Elbe they would have a stable frontier and in time these provinces could very well develop into important regions, don't forget that important trade routes ran through the area, those would be a good incentive. There weren't as many urbanised regions but this was also the case in many parts of Gaul, this would make matters harder, yet not impossible.

[hellheaven1987]

The campaigns of Germanicus were more of punitive raids. Germany was more developped then the Romans thought, for example Caesar said Germany had about no agriculture, hence no reason to there, but he was simply wrong, there was a lot of agriculture in the German lands. Had the Romans been able to succesfully occupy and subjugate Germany up until the Elbe they would have a stable frontier and in time these provinces could very well develop into important regions, don't forget that important trade routes ran through the area, those would be a good incentive. There weren't as many urbanised regions but this was also the case in many parts of Gaul, this would make matters harder, yet not impossible.

Except the punitive campaign was rather long - a 7 years campaign since the disaster in Teutoburg.

It brings the question whether it was actually a punitive raid or not, especially it is hard to believe Roman actually willing to raid an underdeverloped land continuing for seven years.

For the agriculture part, I do agree with you; however, consider the time to develop Britainnia it probably would take far longer to actually develop Germania into profitable status, too long to be cost effective perhaps.

[gaius valerius]

For the agriculture part, I do agree with you; however, consider the time to develop Britainnia it probably would take far longer to actually develop Germania into profitable status, too long to be cost effective perhaps.

One can wonder, to an extend however the importance of the Amber trade could be a more powerful economic incentive then the options the British isles had to offer.

[hellheaven1987]

One can wonder, to an extend however the importance of the Amber trade could be a more powerful economic incentive then the options the British isles had to offer.

Amber trade alone would definately not enough to support the military cost and developing cose in same time, not to mention southern Germania was, despite fertile soil, required a lengthy, costy deforestation program before the land could be enough to cultivate.

Interesting enough though, it seems Carolingian achieved better accomplishment for the colonization of Germany... Worth to study how they achieved that...

[DAVIDE]

Moreover, besides the dangers from a sea tempestuous, horrid and unknown, who would relinquish Asia, or Africa, or Italy, to repair to Germany, a region hideous and rude, under a rigorous climate, dismal to behold or to manureunless the same were his native country?

........................................

Their lands, however somewhat different in aspect, yet taken all together consist of gloomy forests or nasty marshes; lower and moister towards the confines of Gaul, more mountainous and windy towards Noricum and Pannonia; very apt to bear grain, but altogether unkindly to fruit trees; abounding in flocks and herds, but generally small of growth. Nor even in their oxen is found the usual stateliness, no more than the natural ornaments and grandeur of head. In the number of their herds they rejoice; and these are their only, these their most desirable riches. Silver and gold the Gods have denied them, whether in mercy or in wrath, I am unable to determine. Yet I would not venture to aver that in Germany no vein of gold or silver is produced; for who has ever searched? For the use and possession, it is certain they care not. Amongst them indeed are to be seen vessels of silver, such as have been presented to their Princes and Ambassadors, but holden in no other esteem than vessels made of earth.

.................................


If from that time we count to the second Consulship of the Emperor Trajan, the interval comprehends near two hundred and ten years; so long have we been conquering Germany. In a course of time, so vast between these two periods, many have been the blows and disasters suffered on each side. In truth neither from the Samnites, nor from the Carthaginians, nor from both Spains, nor from all the nations of Gaul, have we received more frequent checks and alarms; nor even from the Parthians: for, more vigorous and invincible is the liberty of the Germans than the monarchy of the Arsacides. Indeed, what has the power of the East to allege to our dishonour; but the fall of Crassus, that power which was itself overthrown and abased by Ventidius, with the loss of the great King Pacorus bereft of his life? But by the Germans the Roman People have been bereft of five armies, all commanded by Consuls; by the Germans, the commanders of these armies, Carbo, and Cassius, and Scaurus Aurelius, and Servilius Caepio, as also Marcus Manlius, were all routed or taken: by the Germans even the Emperor Augustus was bereft of Varus and three legions. Nor without difficulty and loss of men were they defeated by Caius Marius in Italy, or by the deified Julius in Gaul, or by Drusus or Tiberius or Germanicus in their native territories. Soon after, the mighty menaces of Caligula against them ended in mockery and derision. Thenceforward they continued quiet, till taking advantage of our domestic division and civil wars, they stormed and seized the winter entrenchments of the legions, and aimed at the dominion of Gaul; from whence they were once more expulsed, and in the times preceding the present, we gained a triumph over them rather than a victory.


- De origine et situ Germanorum, 98 AD

[Barbarian Nobility]

The innitial output of deploying the legions would have drained the economy, but then the construction of mines tapping into Germania's vast silver and iron-ore threads would have added an entirely new layer to the Roman economy, perhaps outshinning the revenue of North Africa and the fertile crescent combined. Conversely it could have made the Hunnic invasions all the more devastating, in contrast though perhaps Germannia would have been the settlement site of choice for groups such as the Visigoths, Suevi and Alani, rather than the balkans, the vital trade route between Constantinople and Rome.

Who knows, even the slightest difference could change the pathways of history into a form we wouldn't even recognise...though my mind can't help but wonder what would have happened if the Germanic tribes were 'Romanised' five hundred years before concepts such as paved roads, aquaducts and written literature became part of the germanic cultural psyche, perhaps the middle ages would have been much shorter and the renaissance and enlightenment would have happened much earlier?

[Exarch]

if anything, it'd be more economical conquering Parthia, which the romans attempted ot do since they'd eliminate the need for a middleman in the silk trade

plus, as marc antony put it in Rome season 2; the east is where the money's at

[hellheaven1987]

if anything, it'd be more economical conquering Parthia, which the romans attempted ot do since they'd eliminate the need for a middleman in the silk trade

plus, as marc antony put it in Rome season 2; the east is where the money's at

Another doubtful choice; clearly, conquering Parthia was far more difficult and complex than conquering Germania, which Roman knew that; hence, Parthia and Rome pretty much came into some sore of mutual understanding during Augustus' reign, eachother privately adimitted the power sphere of two empires (except Armenia, which was the central focus of two empires for next hundred years) until Trajan, for whatever unknown, crazy reasons, broke this mutual understanding. The result was worthless - Roman found Middle East drained too much their resource with little repay, and Parthia fell into Sassanid due to failure of defending their empire. The most fatal result, however, was giving Sassanid an excuse to strike Roman Empire for next few centuries, opening turned the Cold War to a Hot one.

[Claudius Gothicus]

Doubt it conquering Germania was mostly useless, the climate wasn't favorable, there weren't important trade routes, resources were scarce or difficult to get and once you cross the Rhine and Elba you're left with a large and mostly indefensible plain that can be easily overrun by horse riders and steppe tribes.
The mines could have been a very importat income source but the number of legions and garrisons needed to defend the area were not worth it.

[Phalanx300]

There was a big trade route, the Amber trade rout. But economically and looking at their warriors it wouldn't be too profitable to try to conquer it. Let alone being able to control it.

[konny]

Judging from the 1st Century AD, in fact there was not much to be gained in Germania Magna. On the other hand, the region could have developed significantly under Roman rule. For example towns like Mayence, Cologne and of course Trier were founded by the Romans and developed to top-most cities under Roman rule.

Bremen, Dortmund, Magedburg, Frankfurt, Nürnberg or Leipzig were all Medieval foundations that rapidly developed into important trading cities. Had the Romans been able to push their borders to the Elbe for a longer time, we can assume that this region had developed (at least) the same - probably on expenses of the Rhinelands. In fact the Romans had already started with building cities east of the Rhine before everything collapsed again after Teutoburg.

[Wagnijo]

In my view, Germania at that time was too poor to maintain a vast of legions, so perhaps it was good for Rome to lose in the Teutonburg forest. Afterward, Rome didnt need to waste resources to defend that poor land.

We know that it could have been worthwhile.

The northern economy boomed after the empire fell without any drastic
new discoveries. They came later in the medieval period.

First we had the Frankish empire, then the North Sea emporia , then the
German Empire, then the Baltic trade.

So the potential was obviously there.

It is however very doubtful if the romans were capable of recognising it.

[Exarch]

guess it was lucky for the romans that they had a more or less clear border-the rhine river

[hellheaven1987]

guess it was lucky for the romans that they had a more or less clear border-the rhine river

May be, but more major front, such as Middle East front and Britainnia front, had no such thing.

[bleach]

guess it was lucky for the romans that they had a more or less clear border-the rhine river

Was it really? That border didn't do much to deter the Germanians in the fifth century.

You all are wondering whether Germania would have been immediately profitable, but what of our knowledge that WRE was eventually conquered from the north? The Romans didn't need a crystal ball; there were plenty of signs, esp. after the Marcomannic Wars, that the migrations of Germanic tribal groups would be a perpetual source of frontier conflict, with potential of spilling into the civilized lands. If the Romans had nipped Germania in the bud at the height of their power, and prevented the fall of the Western empire--wouldn't the conquest, no matter how costly, have been invaluable in the long term?

[gaius valerius]

Was it really? That border didn't do much to deter the Germanians in the fifth century.

You all are wondering whether Germania would have been immediately profitable, but what of our knowledge that WRE was eventually conquered from the north? The Romans didn't need a crystal ball; there were plenty of signs, esp. after the Marcomannic Wars, that the migrations of Germanic tribal groups would be a perpetual source of frontier conflict, with potential of spilling into the civilized lands. If the Romans had nipped Germania in the bud at the height of their power, and prevented the fall of the Western empire--wouldn't the conquest, no matter how costly, have been invaluable in the long term?

This post is wholly wrong, sorry, or rather, it is totally missing the point.

Even under Caesar it was realised that Germany was a problem, hence the punitive raids. Under August they tried to conquer it and Germanicus pulled of another few punitive campaigns. So the Romans were very well aware of the problems their Rhina-Danube frontier had. The problem in the later wasn't that these problems just appeared out of the blue, but rather that the Romans weren't able to contain them anymore.

First of all the Germanic tribes were tribal confederations, an important aspect of their life was the honour and status to be gained by fighting other tribes (or the Romans) and getting lots of booty. In the Roman empire their was lots of booty to be gained so naturally it was a very attractive victim. The Romans countered this threat quite succesfully by divide and conquer strategems, using one tribe against another. Combined with military campaigns to let them know they were still around and certainly not any weaker, this system was highly succesful. Only 2 things swayed the Germans: gold and swords. As long as these 2 were put to good use, everything was fine enough... this is were the cookie crumbles...

The problem hence didn't come from the German threat as claimed above. The problem stemmed from the fact that the empire was internally disintegrating due to the many civil wars. You see these civil wars drew troops away from the borders, making the empire an even more attractive target, as the legions were more busy fighting each other then protecting the empire, the invaders got more and more daring. Each succesful raid in turn triggered another. Even after the dominate returned some of the political and economic stability, the civil wars continued and the empire kept desintigrating by its own hands.