Anaxagoras
Banned
Sure, but would they be able to increase production to meet demand? And did the Romans like it all that much?
AHC : Make the Roman Empire found widespread colonies
- Thread starter RogueTraderEnthusiast
- Start date
-
- Tags
- colonisation roman empire
Sure, but would they be able to increase production to meet demand? And did the Romans like it all that much?
Sabot Cat
Banned
I suppose if there is something that will make the Romans go to the far seas, it's good wine.
Anaxagoras
Banned
I suppose if there is something that will make the Romans go to the far seas, it's good wine.
Europeans in the 15th Century were willing to risk their lives and fortunes for the chance to snag a few bags of nutmeg and cloves. And wine was MUCH more fundamental to Roman society than spices were to Renaissance Europe.
I have to say, the idea of vast N.American Vineyards is an amusing thought.
I like the idea, so lets run with the idea that the Romans wanted more prime agricultural land. The north is too cold, the south is too hot, the East has Persians, so lets try west, those Venetii ships, they weren't too bad, lets improve on those. (Those details may well be important to has out, but let me roll with this).
Based on Mediterranean agricultural practice, which areas of the New World would be the most suited to growing Roman luxuries, and at which products would need to be grown to make the colonies profitable? Wine seems unlikely unless there is a significant shortage in the Empire Proper (Ideally not caused by a blight). Sugar?
Or if the lands were discovered based on our agricultural premise, would they be seen as a prestige project, or an economic necessity, and thus subsidized, a form of Trans-Atlantic Wine Dole.
Based on either of these ideas, what sort of scale would the colony/colonies be before we have a half-legion/legion sized military force in the Roman Colonies?
Last edited:
Anaxagoras
Banned
That wouldn't have worked, as vitus vinifera grapes couldn't grow in North American before the days of grafted rootstock. However, the point is that the Romans would have been looking for land where grapes would grow, not that they would have found it.
If the Romans discovered the Americas, most likely I could only see them forming some small colonies until they realized that most Muscadine Wine tastes awful when compared to European wine (at this time period at least), so then there would be a lot of abandoned colonies and sad, sad Romans.
History then proceeds as per normal... except on the east coast of North America, where the natives just got a jump to Rome level, plus the diseases get spread around earlier than OTL.
History then proceeds as per normal... except on the east coast of North America, where the natives just got a jump to Rome level, plus the diseases get spread around earlier than OTL.
Napoleonrules
Banned
AH.com has been over this in many discussions- a thousand or two years "head start" on European diseases does nothing to help the Natives, only two outcomes- Europeans arent there in enough contact for the diseases to establish and no immunity is conferred... or- diseases are established and the Native Americans are decimated worse than the old school meaning of the word "to reduce by 1/10th" and in fact it is more like 9/10th.
There is no way to have the number of European viruses to come over at one time per OTL no matter how early you have it and have Natives recover enough to confront Europeans at a later date, unless we are talking at least 4,000 years and even then it's doubtful.
Problems for the natives are that if they get contacted by Old Worlders earlier for a brief time it means that they only get a certain amount of disease that would possibly mean that with a second contact it could still mean another wave of diseases that developed in the Old World during that time. Now if they get contacted later than OTL you would see Europeans or whoever comes with better projectile weapons and navies and this means a even worse first contact for the civilizations. Now what you need is a extended contact that can´t develop into a military conquest, so an earlier and extended contact with Romans that don´t want to conquer them, but imagining such scenario is doubtful if the Romans hear of Incan riches but at the same time I don´t see them expand or even find out the New World, but of course I have too much in my mind the idea of OTL Roman Empire.
I think it's hard to get the Romans to do much more than establish trading posts outside of their region, with is significantly different than settling and projecting power. Europe east of the Rhine and north of the Black Sea and Danube had too many opportunities and threats to warrant an effort of any significance elsewhere. If they pacified those regions then I could see the potential of settlements outside of their established regions. A Roman dominated Baltic would be interesting.
Carthage, with their Phoenician naval traditions, would have been much more likely to colonize regions had they blunted the Roman advance and perhaps fragmented the Roman state.
Carthage, with their Phoenician naval traditions, would have been much more likely to colonize regions had they blunted the Roman advance and perhaps fragmented the Roman state.
Southern Roman Empire...
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/the-southern-roman-empire.200830/
Edit: For some reason the the "link" button was not working for me.
I am afraid, that the OP got no clue, what a "Roman Colonia" really means? And whats the huge difference to any modern colony?
Therfore a roman Colonia is pretty ASB outside of the mediterrenean area!
Well, if the romans get aware what a large foreign trade deficit means, India is not longer save.
But South Africa and America will always stay close to ASB.
Therfore a roman Colonia is pretty ASB outside of the mediterrenean area!
Well, if the romans get aware what a large foreign trade deficit means, India is not longer save.
But South Africa and America will always stay close to ASB.
I did clarify in a later post that I meant something akin to the European settler colonies. I might have to edit the OP.
I think the Romans were aware, or at least partially aware, of what a trade deficit means. I vaguely recall a senator or someone of note cursing India, as all that happened was that gold went to India and never came back.
I suppose. I guess then Roman colonization would be similar to Viking colonization, where it would be an interesting footnote in history but not all that important.
Though it would make people curious about what else is over there, especially if someone finds gold...
Not sure this is what you want but maybe this hypothetical colony could be a refugee for an exiled population. Some minority (ie. Jewish or Basques) rises up and is narrowly defeated, a compromise is reached where these people are 'exiled to the sea' they make it to the shores of North America and manage to survive long enough to establish a self-sustaining colony with Roman level technology.
The other possibility is that this colony is the slowest burn colony ever; a ship is blown off course and discover America but only bring home some interesting stories and a souvenir. The captain's (grand)son becomes obsessed with these stories and decades later to establish a trading post. Armed with more proof and more stories the new land begins to gather some interest. It grows at a snail's pace until the Roman Empire begins to fall apart, as the whole world appears to be ending people start thinking that the Western territory might be the safest place for them.
The other possibility is that this colony is the slowest burn colony ever; a ship is blown off course and discover America but only bring home some interesting stories and a souvenir. The captain's (grand)son becomes obsessed with these stories and decades later to establish a trading post. Armed with more proof and more stories the new land begins to gather some interest. It grows at a snail's pace until the Roman Empire begins to fall apart, as the whole world appears to be ending people start thinking that the Western territory might be the safest place for them.
Not quite what I had in mind, but certainly interesting. Might work in a similar manner if the colony forms early enough that people choose to flee to the Western Colonies when a war comes along.
How could the Roman Empire access to sugarcane? And even if they managed to do it, Egypt, Sicily and Hispania are nearer of Rome than America.
For Baltic, how could they access it? Either they could navigate along the coasts from Gallia to the Jutland, or they could conquier the Danube.
For the commodities, there is fur, amber and salt.
It was spread into Europe by Muslims from the 8th century AD onwards. I suppose the Romans ITTL get it by trading from India? There's lots of places it can be grown, as well.
Well, the Romans held the southern bank of the Danube for centuries - they could conquer their way through the OTL Czech Republic and up the Oder, perhaps. Control of Germania Magna would help.
Well, it'd make Rome expand into the Canary Islands and possibly Madeira and Cape Verde, for access to more sugar-growing land.
Could the Roman Empire expend into Ireland (for additional latifundia growing wheat and raising cattle, pork and sheep -the latter giving also wool), the Red Sea (as a relay for Eastern luxuries) and the Black Sea (same factors as Ireland)?
There were plans to do this IOTL, along with securing the remainder of Scotland. IIRC, the capital of Britannia-Hibernia (or whatever it was supposed to be called) was to be moved to Chester under this scenario, as it would be (a) a major port, and (b) more central.