The difference is that it was worth to conquer North Africa and not worth to conquer Germany. England was more civilized than Germany and conquering it was not worth it, it took centuries of the romans building new settlements and economic activity or the province to bring more profit than expenses. And that’s not even taking in account the rebellions.
Germany would be even worse, a huge territory with nothing valuable inside it and a lot of natives ready to rebels, that’s why the romans gave it up after the first set back but kept going after Carthage, Parthia, and other valuable regions over and over again.
Jahobes on
Carthage was the gateway to the world.
Germania was the gateway to nowhere.
The conquest of Carthage turned Rome into the sole super power in the Mediterranean.
Germania was essentially a political vanity project for some upstart Patrician who wanted to make a name for themselves.
TheMonte04 on
Germania was the Vietnam of the Roman Empire.
Resolution-Honest on
Germanicus did lay waste to Germania afterwards, all the way to river Elba. They ever returned aquila Teutoburg forrest and burried dead legiononaries in tumulus at place of battle.
Degutender on
The virgin empire vs the Chad Republic.
Desperate_One1816 on
Does anyone else feel like the whole “didn’t conquer Germany because it had no use to Rome and had no resources” seems a bit like making sour grapes? There was obviously an abundance of lumber and salt, as well as manpower which the Romans utilized extensively as auxiliaries.
I tend to believe the same thing that happened in Sudan happened in Germany. Rome wanted the territory, tried, and simply couldn’t do it.
7 Comments
The difference is that it was worth to conquer North Africa and not worth to conquer Germany. England was more civilized than Germany and conquering it was not worth it, it took centuries of the romans building new settlements and economic activity or the province to bring more profit than expenses. And that’s not even taking in account the rebellions.
Germany would be even worse, a huge territory with nothing valuable inside it and a lot of natives ready to rebels, that’s why the romans gave it up after the first set back but kept going after Carthage, Parthia, and other valuable regions over and over again.
Carthage was the gateway to the world.
Germania was the gateway to nowhere.
The conquest of Carthage turned Rome into the sole super power in the Mediterranean.
Germania was essentially a political vanity project for some upstart Patrician who wanted to make a name for themselves.
Germania was the Vietnam of the Roman Empire.
Germanicus did lay waste to Germania afterwards, all the way to river Elba. They ever returned aquila Teutoburg forrest and burried dead legiononaries in tumulus at place of battle.
The virgin empire vs the Chad Republic.
Does anyone else feel like the whole “didn’t conquer Germany because it had no use to Rome and had no resources” seems a bit like making sour grapes? There was obviously an abundance of lumber and salt, as well as manpower which the Romans utilized extensively as auxiliaries.
I tend to believe the same thing that happened in Sudan happened in Germany. Rome wanted the territory, tried, and simply couldn’t do it.
Very apt!