Agricola's Folly- The Tale of a Roman Ireland

dduff442

There are a few details of a 1st Century Roman burial at Stoneyford Co Kilkenny here. There's a discussion of some other Roman finds in Ireland here. I'm afraid I'm not nearly expert enough to vouch for the dating details etc. but it is consistent with the little I do know.

OTOH, Drumanagh has no Roman features AFAIK. There are plenty of Roman finds there, sure, but otherwise it's a perfectly normal Celtic promontory fort.
 

Berserker

Ill follow it our of pure curiousity;)

Irish de-centralized states and tribes will not be conquered that easely. no nation ever did it easely
 
Sternberg

Sternberg

Banned
Subscribed. This'll be pretty interesting for me, since I do want to create a Roman-based alternate timeline after my Egyptian, Persian, and Greek timelines.
 

Blackfox5

In the short run, a Roman Ireland will be an economic sinkhole as the costs of maintaining garrisons and building basic economic infrastructure is likely to be more than the value of any resources extracted from it. However, in the context of the times, it is probably something Rome can handle. Rome would likely want to abandon it, but won't because of prestige issues.

In the medium term, a Roman Ireland will be marginally economically productive. Not a source of wealth for the empire, but something that pays for itself and gives a little surplus afterwards. Unlike what happened in Dacia and Mesopotamia, Ireland probably won't be abandoned as any part of border consolidation. The primary reason is that unlike those areas, Ireland isn't threatened by anyone, and abandoning it would not be a cost effective measure.

In the long term, as the Western Empire falls apart, Ireland will not be part of Rome politically, but will be one of the few places of classical civilization to truly survive in the former western empire. I don't think Ireland became threatened by barbarians until well into the Viking Age which means its a lone, protected outpost for classical civilization.

This will make Ireland a rather prosperous and learned center in late antiquity as Britain and Gaul burn under invasion and war. A lot of important texts may be preserved in Latin as well as engineering and political know how. The resulting Irish state could be quite sophisticated in comparison to others. This is where history really gets interesting.

I assume at some point, the Hiberno-Roman culture invades Britain and consolidates some of the Celtic fringe, and perhaps even the Anglo-Saxon lands. It'll be a major source of intellectual stimulation for northwestern Europe which may increase its capacity for state building.

It'll perform that task well until the Viking Age, at which point it becomes important to know how strong of a central state it is and whether it has a significant navy. If not, Ireland gets hit hard and a lot falls apart. If it can adequately resist the Vikings, it spurs stronger state formation and probably serves to unite most of the British Isles in one state. A strong, united land in the British Isles that has preserved much classical learning in northwestern Europe will be one of the major powers in the Middle Ages.
 
Abhakhazia

Abhakhazia

Banned
Chapter One: To the West!

The cold waters of the "Salty" River was all that seperated Gnaeus Julius Agricola from the land of Hibernia. The year would later be known as 81 in the Christian aera. Agricola didn't know much about Christians, only that some were loonies that liked to burn stuff. But what he cared about now was using the Classis Germanica, so benevolently given to him by the Emperor Titus, to get the Legio XX Valeria Victrix across this tiny firth in the Ocean Sea, seperating wild Caledonia from wilder Hibernia. He was nervous, all he had for a guide was a fat, spoiled red headed prince who was in exile for some complicated Celtic reason. As far he knew there was a defensive forse ready to meet him across this thick layer of mist and fog.
He asked the prince- he forgot his name, it was something unpronounceable like a Pictish war cry-if his people were organized in that manner. It was a long, complex answer which boiled down to "no"
And soon the admiral of the classis approached him with happy news there was nothing to meet him. He could labd the XX with no problem.
The admiral asked him "Are you sure this is a good idea, sir?"
Agricola strode out of the room, and just at the last second turned and said "No, admiral, I have no damn idea"
_________________________________________________________________
"A Compact History of Ibern"
by Sean Flaviculd

The thing that promoted "Eire" on to the world stage was Agricola's Imperial backed invasion of the north. As Agricola correctly predicted in his memoirs, it only took one legion, a Batavian Auxillary and a small calvary unit to take the isle. At that point it was fairly sparsely populated, and no major resistance was found until the grand battle that occured after XX Valeria Victrix crossed the river Scanna into the south, where over time, the Hibernians had gathered their army. South to Flaviapolis, at the south end of the isle, the fighting got tougher. The final conquest, celebrated with a great triumph in Rome at the end of 83, led to the Legio XX Valeria Victrix being stationed at a port in central Ibern, now known as Valdert, but then was just called Valeria, and from then on Rome tryed to make it into a new Rome, deserving it's title of "Valour".
 
metastasis_d

metastasis_d

Off to a good start. :) I'll try to add more commentary other than "good chapter" when I can, but like I said, I know very little about this time period. :eek:
 
Errnge

Errnge

Roman Britain likely won't break off in 410 AD this way. The main reason they did was because the Romans couldn't/ wouldn't defend them from Irish and Pictish raiders. This could also mean no, or less, English in Britain because the Romano-Brits would either wouldn't need, or would need less, Angle, Saxon, Jute, and Frisian mercenaries. Also, Pictish might survive as a language if the Gaels never invade Caledonia and Hibernize it.

I think Ireland would be relatively backwater compared to, say, Gaul, Byzantium, Egypt, ect. But it would be great for Ireland in the long run. Establishing unity on the island for the first time might be the key to preventing Ireland from being dominated by Britain later on. Ireland, I think, would become like the Portugal of the British Isles.
 

Zuvarq

Errnge said:
Roman Britain likely won't break off in 410 AD this way. The main reason they did was because the Romans couldn't/ wouldn't defend them from Irish and Pictish raiders. This could also mean no, or less, English in Britain because the Romano-Brits would either wouldn't need, or would need less, Angle, Saxon, Jute, and Frisian mercenaries. Also, Pictish might survive as a language if the Gaels never invade Caledonia and Hibernize it.

I think Ireland would be relatively backwater compared to, say, Gaul, Byzantium, Egypt, ect. But it would be great for Ireland in the long run. Establishing unity on the island for the first time might be the key to preventing Ireland from being dominated by Britain later on. Ireland, I think, would become like the Portugal of the British Isles.
Click to expand...
The Saxons also barely exist, while the Frisians, who were Saxon settlers, are the Frisii, a different people, and the Angles and Jutes simply don't exist yet.
 
Errnge

Errnge

Zuvarq said:
The Saxons also barely exist, while the Frisians, who were Saxon settlers, are the Frisii, a different people, and the Angles and Jutes simply don't exist yet.
Click to expand...

Do you think a Roman Ireland would butterfly their existence? Regardless, I doubt whoever takes their place would have much of a presence in Britain, not nearly as much as the English do OTL.
 

Zuvarq

Errnge said:
Do you think a Roman Ireland would butterfly their existence? Regardless, I doubt whoever takes their place would have much of a presence in Britain, not nearly as much as the English do OTL.
Click to expand...
I think Germanic settlers will inevitably take areas like East Anglia. After all it's thought that the cause of the Anglo-Saxon migration was floods and climate change in the region. And those would still happen ITTL.

Or, perhaps they're defeated in a stronger Britain. An interesting possibility might be that the defeated invaders (including Saxons and several non-OTL Germanic peoples) are enslaved and, in the languages of Britain and Gaul, the word for slave becomes "saxon".
 
Errnge

Errnge

Zuvarq said:
I think Germanic settlers will inevitably take areas like East Anglia. After all it's thought that the cause of the Anglo-Saxon migration was floods and climate change in the region. And those would still happen ITTL.

Or, perhaps they're defeated in a stronger Britain. An interesting possibility might be that the defeated invaders (including Saxons and several non-OTL Germanic peoples) are enslaved and, in the languages of Britain and Gaul, the word for slave becomes "saxon".
Click to expand...

I could see Kent, and East Anglia being largely settled by Germanic tribes, possibly absorbed by the larger Brythonic population.

I think a Norse presence is more likely... but we are getting waaaaaaay ahead of ourselves here I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top