Why did the Romans not invade Ireland?

Answer 1

The Romans, although successfully conquering the Celts of what is no England, were to far stretched to continue into the north. Imagine the logistics of getting enough supplies across Gaul, the English Channel, and up the island of Brittany.

Also, by the time the Romans got around to endeavoring to take Scotland, the empire was in decline, not able to manage the huge amount of land. Constantine was one of the last emperors to attempt taking Scotland.

I imagine many emperors didn't see the advantage to taking Scotland, as there wasn't many resources in the highlands. It was low priority, and The military efforts were needed elsewhere.

Finally, the Picts (now the Scots) were extremely fierce and good at fighting in the highlands of Scotland. The Romans just couldn't deal with the awesomeness =]

The Romans were also scared of the Picts "take no prisoners" fighting style and how brutally the Picts killed people.

Answer 2

They did. They went as far north as present day Inverness but found the weather and the terrain to be so inhospitable that they decided not to stay. They withdrew as far south as present day northern England and built Hadrian's Wall to keep the 'Barbarian' Scots out of their territory. Also it would be too much effort for too little gain, there isn't much in Scotland worth all the manpower needed to take it.

Answer 3

Well, unlike Britain, Ireland had very little to offer the Romans. When the Roman general Agricola was in Britain, according to Tacitus, he looked out at the western island of "Hibernia" and stated that it could be taken with just one legion and a band of auxiliaries. So, its not that Rome couldn't have taken Ireland, its just that it would've been too much effort for too little reward.

Answer 4

Because they did not know the geography of the land and didn't know how large it was. They had trouble enough taking care of Britain, and the boggy highlands were not a good place for a Roman legion to fight.

Answer 5

They did! There are the remains of the Antonine wall roughly Dumbarton to Falkirk - about 40 miles long linked by 24 forts manned between 142 and 162 AD. A number of remains of other forts exist all along the east coast up to and beyond modern Dundee. A northern campaign was waged resulting in the defeat of the Northern tribes at the battle of Mons Grapus somewhere south of Inverness. So all of the lowlands and the central belt was occupied as well as the North East. The Highlands were never occupied after the battle and the Romans eventually withdrew further south, first to the Antonine wall and eventually to Hadrian's wall before Britain was left completely as the Empire collapsed. The Antonine and Hadrians wall both had numerous small forts thrown out in front of them to prevent suprise attacks and control the area so don't believe the films of hoards of tribes suddenly appearing out of the mist!

Answer 6

The Romans, although not actually conquering northern Europe, had a presence there. A Roman cemetery has been found in Denmark, right in suburban Copenhagen, and in Norway and in Sweden, graves have been found with Roman artifacts. It's quite possible that Norwegians and Swedes served in the Roman army. The writer Tacitus, knew of the people of Sweden who he called Suiones, "...who, besides their strength in men and arms, also possess a naval force...."