WI: Britain is not invaded by the Romans?

What kind of Rome, and what kind of Britain, would we see if the British Isles weren't invaded.

What I'm suggesting is Julius Caesar (for whatever reason) chooses not to explore the Islands, get involved with the internal politics of the island and set up client states.

Instead the relationship between the two entities after Gaul's conquest is more cautious but profitable trade. What do we think would happen?
 
Ah, no Julius Caesar is IMHO more complicated than no Claudius. IIRC after Caesar's venture and withdrawal the Celtic nations "modernised" somewhat and the Catuvellauni established some sort of confederal hegemony in the South. Without Caesar this may not even happen, but I'm stumped as to what else was going on.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Ah, no Julius Caesar is IMHO more complicated than no Claudius. IIRC after Caesar's venture and withdrawal the Celtic nations "modernised" somewhat and the Catuvellauni established some sort of confederal hegemony in the South. Without Caesar this may not even happen, but I'm stumped as to what else was going on.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

There was a fair amount of "modernisation" going on purely through trade, so this might continue.

However, either the Romans try to invade a bit later than IOTL, or turn as much of the Celtic states as possible into clients, not unlike in, say, Anatolia.
 
Ah, no Julius Caesar is IMHO more complicated than no Claudius. IIRC after Caesar's venture and withdrawal the Celtic nations "modernized" somewhat and the Catuvellauni established some sort of con-federal hegemony in the South. Without Caesar this may not even happen, but I'm stumped as to what else was going on.
The Invasion in 57 BC was in response to Britain's Involvement during Caesar's conquest of Brittaney. It was canceled due to problems back in Rome.
Move Caesars' Political Problems back a few months, and No Invasion.
 
I guess the concept to consider is that they don't invade in 55bc but they don't invade later either.

It seems likely to me the Roman trade will, by mere diffusion. Those richer areas to the South will prosper greater than those less desirable and further from the channel, but lands containing raw resources desired by Rome will become highly fought over by coalitions and alliances of different tribes and clans.

What happens in Germania is, I feel, perhaps very important in this scenario since a more Romano-Germanic population would be moving to Gaul than to Britain and possibly even more stable, but a similar state of the German tribes may move to the alternative Britain in even greater numbers than OTL.
 
It's really Cludius' invasion you need to butterfly away, rather than Caesar's.

How about he dies (naturally or otherwise) sometime in Caligiula's reign, and when Caligula gets his, a civil war ensues, keeping Rome tied up for the next few years, during which Britain drops way down the priority list.
 
It's really Cludius' invasion you need to butterfly away, rather than Caesar's.

How about he dies (naturally or otherwise) sometime in Caligiula's reign, and when Caligula gets his, a civil war ensues, keeping Rome tied up for the next few years, during which Britain drops way down the priority list.
I would assume that stopping Caesar's invasion butterflies away Cludius' invasion.
 
Would it be possible to have it the other way around, i.e. that Caesar really conquered the British Isles? Do we have any threads about that?
 
the first thing that popped into my mind was just how much influence the free Celts in Britain would have over the conquered tribes of the Continent... would the British tribes be tempted to meddle in the affairs of the Continent? Would the conquered Celts look at Britain in jealousy of their freedom? Or were tribal rivalries just too bitter? Of course, this would only be a consideration for a couple of generations... once the Celts became Romanized, one would think they didn't pine for their freedom so much...
 
I've been thinking about this today.

By hook or by crook the Southern Tribes of Britain will be modernising faster than it's not difficult to imaging them trying to dominate the less developed further to the North. From my understanding however, Celtic society doesn't really allow for States in the traditional sense.

Britain would be more forested, more tribal and less connected. Would this continue on even as the Gauls become more Romanised and Roman wealth and trade influences them?

Fast forward to Rome's collapse, would we see Germanic tribes settling in Britain in any number?
 
By hook or by crook the Southern Tribes of Britain will be modernising faster than it's not difficult to imaging them trying to dominate the less developed further to the North. From my understanding however, Celtic society doesn't really allow for States in the traditional sense.

Well, what are we defining as a state?

But ignoring that for the moment, there were some relatively centralised Celtic states; the one that immediately springs to mind is the Kingdom of Noricum. At the time the Romans first encounter them, the Norisci are merely the head of a large confederation of tribes in the area of Noricum, but within twenty years or so the evidence points to the Norisci actually creating a sovereign kingship over the others. It's speculated but not proven that the strong relationship Noricum developed with Rome was partially responsible for its internal strength as a state.
 
Well, what are we defining as a state?

But ignoring that for the moment, there were some relatively centralised Celtic states; the one that immediately springs to mind is the Kingdom of Noricum. At the time the Romans first encounter them, the Norisci are merely the head of a large confederation of tribes in the area of Noricum, but within twenty years or so the evidence points to the Norisci actually creating a sovereign kingship over the others. It's speculated but not proven that the strong relationship Noricum developed with Rome was partially responsible for its internal strength as a state.
True, but we have to take care of seeing the Celts through the eyes of the Romans and therefore translating their own experiances and understandings into the Celtic society.

We assume that the Celts have less contact with all the Roman Tribes including the Norsci but if there is enough to allow for some kind of centralised statehood among the different tribes what then?
 

Thande

Donor
What exactly are the Romans doing instead? Are they just establishing trade agreements with the Britons for tin trade and so forth?

While not impossible, I can't see the Romans leaving Britain completely alone--firstly free Britons might inspire their Gaulish cousins to revolt, and secondly (as Claudius observed in OTL) Britain is a relatively easy conquest for both prestige and a disproportionately rich prize (both tin and sheep farming).
 
What exactly are the Romans doing instead? Are they just establishing trade agreements with the Britons for tin trade and so forth?

While not impossible, I can't see the Romans leaving Britain completely alone--firstly free Britons might inspire their Gaulish cousins to revolt, and secondly (as Claudius observed in OTL) Britain is a relatively easy conquest for both prestige and a disproportionately rich prize (both tin and sheep farming).
Well considering the size of the empire I'm sure it's not outside the plausibility for there never to be an oppotune moment to invade. Roman Civil war, Germania, Parthia etc.
 
I'm sorry but I don't understand where you are getting at. Are you saying they'll be conquered and colonized by the Vikings?

Well, considering Danelaw, I believe he is right.
If the Germans never come to England (which I'm not saying they won't; they probably still would) than there are going to be a lot less people to resist the vikings; therefore they will continue to dominate England and Scotland.
 
Fast forward to Rome's collapse, would we see Germanic tribes settling in Britain in any number?

Just an idea: assuming that Rome doesn't conquer Britain, wouldn't the island become a target of Germanic tribes even before than IOTL? I mean, the Germanics might believe that it would be easier to invade the islands instead of creating wars with the Romans (who might even support the idea).
 
Just an idea: assuming that Rome doesn't conquer Britain, wouldn't the island become a target of Germanic tribes even before than IOTL? I mean, the Germanics might believe that it would be easier to invade the islands instead of creating wars with the Romans (who might even support the idea).
Unless, with no troops in Britain and a reasonably peacful existance there, the Romans have better look Romanising the Germanic Tribes.

If Britain is more war (no central state, different tribal factions competing for control of raw materials to trade with Rome) thwy might even face some resistance to what they see as invaders of the island?
 
Would it be possible to have it the other way around, i.e. that Caesar really conquered the British Isles? Do we have any threads about that?

Well, Caesar was a little too busy to be off conquering Britain. He went on a little jaunt, once more, and then went home, to simplify.

What exactly are the Romans doing instead? Are they just establishing trade agreements with the Britons for tin trade and so forth?

While not impossible, I can't see the Romans leaving Britain completely alone--firstly free Britons might inspire their Gaulish cousins to revolt, and secondly (as Claudius observed in OTL) Britain is a relatively easy conquest for both prestige and a disproportionately rich prize (both tin and sheep farming).


There are richer prizes, and prizes easier to hold. I'd mention Dacia as the primary contender, though the Romans would obviously love to blunder about in Mesopotamia. I wouldn't say the Romans are too "sword-hilt happy" not to attack Britain, but it's just something that might be in their sights, and due to its relative remoteness, it's a good prestige conquest, for a quick military success early within one's reign. For Claudius, the most important part about Britain, and I've argued this point before, was that his successful war in Britain greatly solidified his rule.
 
Top