At the peak of its power, the Roman Empire actually owned half of the civilized and known world at that time. Tribes, peoples, states bowed before her. What the Romans never included were the lands of Magna Germania. Has one of the greatest empires in the history of mankind broken its teeth against the recalcitrant Germans? Let's try to figure it out.
First of all, it is worth understanding what Rome was at the end of the 1st century AD and what Germany was at that moment. Germany is a "wild field" inhabited by scattered tribes that are at the level of a tribal community. For the most part, the Germans lived in something like villages from a few dozen to several hundred people. Rome is a universal, highly organized slave empire with a unified political system and a proto-regular army.
Roman expansion was never carried out according to the principle: “Let's conquer those natives over there. What for? And just like that!” Since Rome was a slave-owning empire, it was primarily interested in densely populated regions in order to capture slaves during military campaigns. For a long time, Rome remained only in those places where it was possible to take something, where there were valuable resources or territories suitable for agriculture, and also where the most important trade routes passed.
Let's look at the main Roman campaigns in the history of the Republic and the Empire. The war with Carthage and the North African peoples was fought for control of the sea trade routes. The war with the Greek states was fought for the same reasons. The Romans went to Spain for slaves and metals. To Gaul for the same reasons, and also for the sake of capturing new lands for Roman colonization. The conquest of Britain was mainly due to the rich deposits of tin and copper on the islands, and for centuries of their stay, the Romans managed to pump out almost all the surface metal from the skeletons occurrence.
Egypt was captured because of agricultural territories, gold mines in the south of the Nile Valley and trade routes with the east, including India and China. The latter reason played an unimportant role in the conquest of Judea and part of the Middle East. But for some reason, down the Nile to the tribes of black Nubians, where there is nothing but savages and crocodiles, neither the Romans nor the Egyptians in their time went.
The same thing happened with the lands of the Germans. What was to be taken from people who live in impenetrable forests and on holidays (well, that is, for war) smear bear feces over their naked bodies? And it's not a joke. Of course, the Romans went to Germany more than once. But the task of trying to conquer these territories in the broad sense has never been. Julius Caesar was one of the first to “walk” to Germany, having arranged a traditional Roman massacre there in order to intimidate local tribes. Actually, most of the Roman military leaders went there with this task: to arrange a bloody terror so that the Germans would not even think of climbing into non-Roman territory. It is important to understand that the Romans, of course, were "bloody dogs", only the Germans were completely worth their "civilized" neighbors and did the same - regular raids on Roman territory in order to capture slaves and robbery.
Therefore, the tribes had to be intimidated and placed in tributary relations. The Germans paid tribute to the Romans, mostly natural products, and also supplied soldiers for the Roman legions as auxiliaries - allied warriors. There was no talk of colonization and Romanization of German lands: then these were very poor and meager lands, for the most part the territory of "Magna Germania" lay impenetrable forests, it was on a Roman scale to engage in agriculture there impossible. Even if the Romans had cut down the forests by driving tens of thousands of slaves there, because of the climate, Germany would not have been able to become an effective agrarian region with the then agriculture. Absolutely not a profitable investment of forces and resources when you have the granaries of an empire like Spain, Italy, Sicily, Africa (modern Tunisia) and Egypt.
Of course, the Germans from time to time rebelled against Roman rule: they refused to pay tribute, went on raids, and attacked the border camps of the legions. The most famous performance of the Germans, of course, was the massacre in the Teutoburg Forest, when a confederation of Germanic tribes and the German auxilia, which went over to their side, defeated 3 Roman legions marching on the march during several days battles. But speaking of the battle in Teutoburg, many forget to remember that a few years later the Romans sent a new punitive expedition to Magna Germania and defeated the Germans. At the same time, one should not think that all the Germans participated in the uprising. Many tribes either stayed on the sidelines, or hurried to become friends with the Romans as quickly as possible, denoting their innocence, knowing full well what the empire would do next.
It would also be a mistake to think that everything in the relations between the Romans and the Germans was based on terror alone: weak-willed Germans trembled before the empire, and only a few frankly repulsed leaders tried something do. Germany has been a problem for the Romans throughout history. Because it was not a single state with which one could agree, but a scattering of tribes and clans. Someone could be intimidated, but punitive expeditions did not even reach someone. Some constantly raided the Romans no matter what, others actively traded with the Romans. And most importantly, the Romans actively practiced bribing the leaders so that they either squabbled among themselves or at least did not disturb the border. For this purpose, special jewelry workshops, “barbariacarii”, even operated in Italy, which made jewelry specifically for gifts to the Germans: very bright, colorful, “gypsy” products. The Romans themselves did not wear this. In general, the relationship between the empire and the tribes was varied and complex.
>>>>Ideas for life | NOVATE.RU<<<<
In conclusion, it is important to understand one thing: when the Romans really needed it, they achieved whatever it cost and no matter how many legions it cost. The most illustrative example in this regard is Judea, through which there was trade with the East, including India and China. At first, Judea was a Roman protectorate. However, due to the internal political instability of the Jewish state, Rome constantly lost control over this region. At some point, the Romans simply captured Judea and included it in their composition. The Jews rebelled, slaughtered the Roman legions, liberated their cities. And how did it all end each time and in the end?
And the same as always: an empire with much greater economic power and virtually unlimited mobilization potential of a relatively small the kingdom of the Middle East simply digested all the rebels and those who did not agree with the export of "Roman democracy" in the form of legions of 4.5 thousand evil men. And in the end, instead of the Temple, only the Wailing Wall remained, and everywhere there were statues of the emperor, Jupiter and purple standards with "S.P.Q.R" hung. If the Roman Empire broke its teeth about someone, then it was definitely not scattered Germans, but Parthia, which later became the Sassanid Empire or the Second Persian Empire. But that's a completely different story.
In continuation of the topic, read about why in ancient rome mysterious white pebbles were inserted into the roads.
A source: https://novate.ru/blogs/161021/60898/