What if Roman authorities in Britannia found the Tyndrum gold mine sometime in the 140s, when the empire's power was at its peak? Would they be able to extract it with the technology they had, and, assuming such a thing was possible, would they be able and willing to subjugate all of Britain under their rule? If the answer is yes, what could the island look like by the time things start to get dicey for the Romans in the late 4th century?
Rome finds gold in Scotland?
- Thread starter Vinization
- Start date
Rome never found Scotland to be worth the cost it would take to conquer the region or people. If they found gold in Scotland then they would have had their reason and the Picts would have been conquered
If they found gold that Early, a lot of the energy wasted on Germania would be sent there...we could see a full fledge British Island being Roman....
Isn't the Tyndrum mine having issues being productive even today? Were the veins even accessible by Roman technology?
I guess you'd need some pretty succesful campaigns early on at the very least, given that the picts didn't have access to the gold themselves and Romans never really colonized long enough to find out (due to the weather I guess).
5 parts in a MILLION of gold? Yeah, no, that is totally beyond Roman tech.wiki said:
On the other hand, there are "easier" deposits of gold the Kingdom of Scotland exploited since the 15th century so it should be very possible for the Romans to find gold. Most of these were south of the Antonine Wall so it would more likely result in that area becoming the northernmost frontier of the Roman Empire and some local development of the area.
If Rome had a reason beyond "stop burning Northumbria you assholes," what we call Edinburgh would probably see a similar history as london- roman fort into roman city. Maybe Edyninum or Edynum? either way, it would definitely lead to more settlement and value in the area, much like spain or anatolia OTL. i could even see the security of that gold becoming important enough that Ireland gets smacked around a little more than it did otl.
though... with more gold, could rome afford better military reforms and keep the soldiers more loyal?
though... with more gold, could rome afford better military reforms and keep the soldiers more loyal?
In the long run I don't think it will make too much of a difference in terms of military reforms and loyalty of soldiers, Rome was already very rich, this is another bonus of course but on a grand scale I don't think that it will make too much of a change with respect to that, however I could be wrong. Of course the British Isles will get more development and have more importance since there is the gold.
With Britannia now a major source of gold, would rome be willing to part with it early? Could that butterfly Anglo-Saxon invasions to the point of a romance speaking Britain?
Maybe you have a rump state in britannia if the roman population is high enough and there is enough importance placed on it
OP I don't think you need the discovery of the gold veins for Rome to decide that Caledonia et Pictonia is worth the effort as Romes capacity to discover it is very limited seeing as the Scots only found it a few decades ago. Instead, the Scottish lowlands had a lot of lead and Rome could of held it for this alone, similar to the rugged Britannia Occidentalis. To acomplish this Agricola is your man, and only after a few generations of a Roman hold on Britannia, Caledonia and Hibernia is enough to prevent the construction of a static border in the form of Hadrians and Antonines walls, though I still think that very marginal regions would be not held by Rome so the highlands and Connaught. There were other regions Rome could have conquered for mineral resources such as the Ore mountains that were not conquered so Rome was not poor of options if it decided to expand its mineral production capacity. Roman production of mineral resources declined following the second century but even still the Romans were very resource rich, see this wikipedia article for instance.
en.wikipedia.org
None of this will have a significant impact on preventing a fall of Rome similar to the fifth century as a firmer hold on Britannia would not deal with the political, social and corruption issues of the late empire. As for romanistation, it would leave Scotland as a Celtic and not Germanic nation (I know people think its celtic but imo its not) in the alternate timeline, with a Romanisation similar to Roman Dumnonia and Wales. There may not be a Scotland, instead Scottish medieval history would probably be similar to that of Wales in our timeline.
Map of non ferrous metals plus iron. Sloppily highlighted land is area that I think Rome would take.
Roman metallurgy - Wikipedia
None of this will have a significant impact on preventing a fall of Rome similar to the fifth century as a firmer hold on Britannia would not deal with the political, social and corruption issues of the late empire. As for romanistation, it would leave Scotland as a Celtic and not Germanic nation (I know people think its celtic but imo its not) in the alternate timeline, with a Romanisation similar to Roman Dumnonia and Wales. There may not be a Scotland, instead Scottish medieval history would probably be similar to that of Wales in our timeline.
Map of non ferrous metals plus iron. Sloppily highlighted land is area that I think Rome would take.
Last edited: