Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Expert Authentication - Accurate Descriptions - Reasonable Prices - Coins From Under $10 To Museum Quality Rarities Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Support Our Efforts To Serve The Classical Numismatics Community - Shop At Forum Ancient Coins

New & Reduced


Author Topic: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?  (Read 2231 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

basemetal

  • Guest
The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« on: April 02, 2007, 11:38:22 pm »
There may be volumes already extant on this topic of which I'm sadly ignorant of.
But what of the proposition that the Roman Empire from, I'll place a somewhat arbitrary date of 68 A.D.,
was an empire, unlike some others, in that most of the expansion of the empire, the wins, the losses, the advances, and the retreats were, when boiled down to the  underlying reasons, was in essence, a matter of "keeping those barbarian bastards off our backs" as opposed to "We need the gold, silver, copper, land, slaves, crops, ports, and other things to help us live the life of Empire"?
Even most of Trajan's conquests were to put down rebellions, settle old scores, destroy this or that fledgeling empire, depose or raise this or that monarch as a puppet and similar as opposed to "we need that damn forest land of the Dacians." Also if any emperor had a hobby that was war, Trajan was the guy.  Did Trajan and the Roman Empire really need Arabia as a Roman province?
I know colonists were often settled in a conquered province, but was that not just to "Romanize" it and thus cut down on future insurrections?
Granted, in the time of Antoninus Pius the empire was relatively calm, but as history records, Marcus Aurelius had to do a lot of head-bashing immediately after, nor was Antioninus immune from the punitive expedition or three.
A secondary question would be at what point did the empire ever have all the resources it needed to support it's population without conquering a particular region to get some natural or other resource that was in short supply?  Or did it ever?   
I know that at that perhaps imaginary point, if it existed, there were always "barbarians at the gate" so to speak.  But was there ever a "golden balance" in the empire?  This last question is not the thrust of my main question, be aware.
One more thing.  How does all this relate to: "Got a bunch of guys with swords, shields, and training. What to do with them in the off-season?"

Offline slokind

  • Tribuna Plebis Perpetua
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6654
  • Art is an experimental science
    • An Art Historian's Numismatics Studies
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2007, 11:44:47 pm »
Sometimes defensive, like all the others.  P.L.

Offline David Atherton

  • IMPERATOR
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 4704
  • The meaning of life can be found in a coin.
    • Flavian Fanatic Blog
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #2 on: April 03, 2007, 12:18:58 am »
A couple of books you might want to check out on this subject:

The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire - Edward N. Luttwak
Romans and Barbarians - Derek Williams

I found both books very informative and William's books is quite a wonderful read.

basemetal

  • Guest
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2007, 08:40:59 pm »
Thank you David.  May I ask before I look, is William's book hard to get?   I'd love to read it and will.

Offline Tiathena

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1131
  • Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #4 on: April 03, 2007, 09:21:06 pm »
 
    Ave B!
 
  27 Used & New through Amazon, Romans and Barbarians: Four Views from the Empire's Edge, 1st Century Ad.
 
  ..Does look like yet-another interesting read.
  If I order another two books from Amazon any time soon, I think I qualify for a free snorkel…  &nd I’ll need one.
 
    Best,
    Tia
 
Facilius per partes in cognitionem totius adducimur.  ~ Seneca
My Gallery

Offline David Atherton

  • IMPERATOR
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 4704
  • The meaning of life can be found in a coin.
    • Flavian Fanatic Blog
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #5 on: April 03, 2007, 10:08:27 pm »
Thank you David. May I ask before I look, is William's book hard to get? I'd love to read it and will.


I found a copy for $4 at a local used bookstore.

And Tia is correct, the book is easily found on ebay at a reasonable price.

It has one of the best narrative accounts of the Varian disaster I've ever read...so it's well worth the price of admission!

basemetal

  • Guest
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #6 on: April 04, 2007, 12:46:24 am »
I got it!  It's on they way.  7.95 plus shipping!
And Tia, I hope you win that snorkel.  It at times should be useful here.  Things often get deep!

scardan123

  • Guest
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2007, 05:01:12 pm »
Please let us also not forget that waging a war was (is?) often also a way to accumulate wealth. When Julius Caesar went to conquer Gallia, Gallia was considered a barbaric, not very interesting potential province (the wealthy provinces were in the orient, with spices and gold and pearls), but he came back immensly rich, probably the richest man in the world.
Conquering an oriental province meant a flush of gold for the conqueror.
With regards to the defence against the barbarians, let us also not forget that the late roman army was mainly made by barbarians... fighting other barbarians. The roman army was infact mostly made by non-romans, even in the high ranks many were not romans. That's easy: there were not enough romans to make such a big army. And serving in the military was (is?) the best way to get "naturalized". Truly the army was (is?) a unique melting pot and a terrific aggregation tool (what unites more than facing death together? death is death regardless if you are from the partian empire, rome-city, gallia, dacia, etc etc)

Offline Robert_Brenchley

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 7307
  • Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    • My gallery
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #8 on: May 03, 2007, 05:40:49 pm »
Got 'Romans and Barbarians' new for £8.55 on UK Amazon.
Robert Brenchley

My gallery: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=10405
Fiat justitia ruat caelum

Offline Tiathena

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1131
  • Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2007, 08:51:25 pm »
 
   A good deal I’m sure.
  I just purchased it also – for $9.25, through Amazon US.
  ..Haven’t received it yet, but am sure worth every penny.
 
  b/r
  Tia
 
Facilius per partes in cognitionem totius adducimur.  ~ Seneca
My Gallery

Offline Robert_Brenchley

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 7307
  • Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    • My gallery
Re: The Roman Empire-a defensive Empire?
« Reply #10 on: May 12, 2007, 04:00:15 pm »
Mine arrived yesterday, but I've hardly had a chance to look at it yet. I'll read it over the holiday, in a few weeks' time.
Robert Brenchley

My gallery: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=10405
Fiat justitia ruat caelum

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity