Why did Rome invade Britain?

Maybe they wanted to find all the people with bad genes from the rest of Europe and filter them in a containment zone.
It worked

Because they wanted to REMOVE GOBLIN.

Caesar was a nigger

why is everyone ignoring the dead Goblin!?

The Veneti.

Heres the actual reason:

Claudius wanted the legitimacy military conquest would bring to his reign. He picked Britannia basically because Caesar failed to do so, meaning he would look great if he did conquer it.

Besides, the island was filthy rich with resources

That's woad leaf paint, not tattoos you mong.

>Why did Rome invade Britain?
Julius Caesar learned from Ezekiel's and Daniel the prophet's literature
that the Ten Horns Tabernacle was buried at the Magnificent precinct
Sacred to Apollo under a notable Spherical Temple on North island.

The Temple, of course, is Stone Hedge Henge.

Haha, And that too.

>Why did Rome invade Britain?
They were invading the mainland.

Tin (loads of it), lead, copper, iron

Oh boy i just finished a 3000 word paper on this.

The short answer is for political benefit.
The long answer is for political benefit.

All other reasons, reasons, security, are folly.

Coal, obviously. They wanted to kickstart the industrial revolution but the Germanic savages unfortunately brought the empire down before it was even possible.

Very interesting, thanks for your insight

I meant to say resources.

The resource argument is mostly bullshit. There isn't even much evidence for excessive tin mining. It's a hand wave reason given by patriotic british historians.

I can explain more.

Caesar invaded because he wanted to increase his political reputation. Britain was an essentially unknown island in his time, and shrouded in mystery and fear, so to invade it made him look courageous and powerful. This is also where the resource argument has some weight, as it was unknown he did also want to scout the Island to see if it was worth conquering, see what's actually there, bring Britain into Roman conciousness. He did this too.

Claudius invaded Britain entirely for political reasons. The man's rule was incredibly weak, he was the first emperor to be thrust onto the throne through the praetorian guard rather than being a nominated heir, so he looked illegitimate, he was also physically disabled which to superstitious ancient people basically means the Gods fucking hate you, not the sort of man you want as emperor.
So what better way to secure your position then through glorious military conquest and a very public triumph, and build a few monuments and mint some coins commemorating it too. Nevermind the fact that he only spent 16 day in Britain and didn't take part in any battles, coming after the initial conquest.

The resource argument is weak because new history on the topic shows that even during Roman Britain's height, the island's wealth at very best only matched the expenditure required to run the island and pay all the soldiers stationed on it, maintain hadrians wall, etc. It was never profitable for the Romans, all that mining they did was just to break even. Further proof comes from the fact that the industries in Britain was state owned and not private ventures, the Empire needed that income just to run the place.

>the Empire needed that income just to run the place.

Which is probably why they abandoned the island in the latter days of the empire, it simply wasn't worth keeping in deteriorating situation.

archaeology.co.uk/articles/opinion/is-stonehenge-roman.htm

Julius Caesar excavated holes at Centre of Stonehenge.
Cannot see the Seven Heads Helestone from there JC?

Yeah, Britain was always a Roman vanity project, it wasn't worth it otherwise. Maybe if Agricola had been allowed to finish the job and conquer Scotland, but having never done that, the northern raids never ended, making it a continual pain in the ass needing a large garrison.

I'll concede that the Romans didn't know how much the island would cost before invading, but politics was definitely the main motivation, with a "well we can probably catch a lot of slaves and strip mine the place" as a second thought.

To test my abilities...

> Was there resources on it or something?

Yes;

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Roman.Britain.Production.jpg

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Roman.Britain.Mining.jpg/1200px-Roman.Britain.Mining.jpg

contrary to constant fucktalking, Roman Spain, Gaul and Britain became far wealthier in a very short span of time than they were before Roman conquest.

...

...

cause they were a bunch of guido's looking to flex

I think he was talking about the initial expedition where nothing other than forlorn trader hearsay was fact to the Romans.

they abandoned the island because troops were thin and were needed to protect balkan provinces from eastern invaders.

What the hell is this?

>Claudius' rule was incredibly weal
Is it common practice nowadays that one must take a well-regarded historical opinion and challenge it in their edgy undergrad papers to think they're sticking it to the man or whatever dumb reasons possesses people to ignore source material and time-tested historical due dligence?

Average anglo men

It's splash image of the fantasy game Nethergate where you do RPG shit as either Romans or Celts in a magical valley filled with fantasy beings. My god killing the first elf as Romans was dank.

It was filled with C*lts that had the impertinence to still be alive, and it was Rome's moral duty to correct them.

Britain was to Rome what Australia became for the Brits.

I thought that's what regular inhabintats of Wales looked like, would explain their naming of towns and such

>>The naked guy is moving his shield out of the way so he can be more easily stabbed
He was an enlightened man and knew the benefits it would bring the britain if it was romanized

For The Glory of Rome

why precisely explained bye

>long answer is one character short of short answer
heh

>It's a hand wave reason given by patriotic british historians.

The fuck? What's patriotic about saying Britain was full of tin and other metals? It's a fact, or do you wanna deny the earth is round too?

>Why did Rome invade Britain?

Rome’s economy was based on conquering neighboring people and stealing their stuff and enslaving them so once you’ve looted one people, you have to go on and loot their neighbors and so on.

1. Roman Infrastructure means that they can't really go that far from the coast, unless they build proper roads.
Which do show up in all Roman maps, even if they aren't honest, since they will often control city states, with law less areas around that.
Britain is a very special case, since they actually did go further inland than in other areas, and even built walls.

2. Rome's main priority for expansion, was luxury.
Basically, for a shitty feudal economy, thats perfectly fine when you are running a coast Euro empire, and eating the greater fruits of Africa and Arabia.
Half the reason Rome was so fancy, was that it ran of the fumes of using so much resources of its Empire.

When your ability to mine is of such a level: That you can't actually go deep
There won't be traces of excessive Tin mining. Deepest Mines Rome could even accomplish had troubles reaching 10 meters of depth. So by their standards, poking a little, is "waste over mining that takes decades".
Resource argument do also make sense, since that includes different agriculture products, that can't be produced in a Italian or Arabian Clima.
On the top of more land, to give to veterans doing whatever, since Real Estate is a very valuable trade resource.

>island is filled with celts and nobody wants gaul part two
>makes the emperor look good
>island is also fikthy with resources

G O B B L IN