Introduction
The relationship between Rome and the province of Britannia is complex and the state’s methods of maintaining the province varied throughout Romes's rule of Britain.
Rome saw Britannia as a valuable island that would benefit the whole empire. To those who were submissive, they were merciful; yet to those who revolted, they were ruthless. Rome offered civilization and many other benefits that came from citizenship and alliances. It effectively set up the quarrelling tribes of Brittania to eventually become the largest empire in history.
Imperialism can be defined as a method of establishment and maintenance. As methods changed according to the administrator, the relationship between Roman and Britain was intricate.
What is Imperialism?
Although imperialism cannot be easily defined for many reasons it is, at its core, a simple term.
The term imperialism is derived from imperium, a Latin word meaning the authority to command and assume obedience. However, the word is relatively modern, and thus it is difficult to apply to an ancient civilisation.
It has changed and evolved with history and like many political terms, it has been given meanings that derive from ideological biases. Thus, it has evolved into an extraordinarily complex word with many different approaches to its definition.
The literal meaning of imperialism does not have any defining characteristics, rather it revolves around those of the empire. However, it has been labelled with common characteristics according to the patterns of rule that the greatest empires of all time have implemented.
Imperialism is a method, not a policy, and thus it differs from ruler to ruler. It can be defined simply in a way that correlates to any stage in history. According to Erskine, imperialism is the method of establishment and maintenance that an empire uses. Without the ideologically biased constructions of imperialism the word is at its core, the process by which an empire runs. This correlates with the original definition of the word, as empires are authorities, and their methods used for governance aim for obedience from those it commands.
Because Imperialism is a method, its characteristics will vary between different empires—and even rulers.
Imperialism in the Roman Empire: Britain
The relationship between the State of Rome and the British tribes was established by military conquest and often maintained by fear.
Rome’s major military presence in Britain caused strain between the British natives and their overlords. Rome was an aggressor and had taken from the Briton’s life as they knew it. Because Rome had established itself in Britannia by war, it was always necessary for their leaders to enforce control through military means.
Britannia was a warlike province, and many of the tribes were constantly rebellious and disquieted.
There are many examples of this.
Before Gnaeus Julius Agricola, a brilliant Roman General, took governance of the British provinces, they were in a confusion of shifts between war and peace with constant disturbances, civil war, and mutinies. Even during peaceful periods, the superstitions of the natives would cause them to rise in rebellion. Once taking the army in a particular city unawares, they “slaughtered the infantry to a man.”
These conflicts had a massive impact on the relationship between the governor and the governed—breeding distrust, hatred and bitterness between the two peoples. It was partly due to the unconquerable spirit of the natives that Rome was so dependent on a strong military to establish and maintain its power in Britain.
Roman Exploitation of Britain
Rome’s relationship with the British people was primarily for its empire’s benefit. In Tacticus’ account of Agricolas's life, he describes the resources that Britain provides, noting them as worth the conquest.
Roman Generals viewed the conquest of people and lands as an opportunity to enhance their own glory and the glory and gain of Rome. Wars, though costly and risky, often gifted leading generals with glory and prestige and spread fear of Rome throughout its empire. The military ethos of Rome stressed the importance of plunder and the display of booty at triumphs was important for the recognition due to victorious generals.
Campaigns also expanded the reach of the empire and brought ever-increasing benefits from conquered provinces.
Those who profited most were the Roman state, the elite upper class, Roman allies and the troops themselves. Although the Roman Empire brought many good things to the Britons, their relationship with Britain primarily benefited them.
Maintaining Power
Rome could more effectively maintain its empire by treating the countries under her control as allies.
The Romans could have easily viewed the provinces of Rome as members of a familiar culture and unified society, allies who could help strengthen the Roman empire. As the ruling state, Rome had the responsibility to unite conquered countries under itself and to keep the peace and diminish the likelihood of revolts.
One thing that Rome required of its allies was a yearly supply of troops to assist Rome. This benefited both Rome and the Britons as it assured a higher degree of protection and security for both sides.
In this way, Rome and the tribes of Britannia became allies because of their common desire for security. Many have even argued that Rome became great largely because of its constant and faithful defence of its allies.
The natural outcome of this was the conquest of territory and the strengthening of Roman authority. Defeated countries that became allies upon either conquest by, or surrender to Rome, benefited from the spoils of wars.
As related by Tacticus in his writings on Agricola's life, the British tribes, who allied themselves with Rome, often fought under Rome against other tribes. Moreover, since Rome had a more advanced and effective military, this practice was arguably more efficient and beneficial for the Britons as a way of keeping order and safety from hostile neighbors.
Alliances between Rome and countries under her control were effective and advantageous for both sides. Rome's maintenance of alliances between provinces under their control was an effective method of unification within their empire.
Fear and Appeasement
To keep peace and prosperity the Romans had to find a balance between appeasing the British and using fear to control them.
Wars and campaigns demonstrated Romes's strength and maintained fear and respect in rebellious provinces. The Romans recognised that when that fear wasn't strong enough, the British would rebel.
Tacticus states that when the fear of Rome was quelled, the Britons would begin to magnify the wrongs done to them and complain about their cruel oppression. When the natives rebelled, Agricola never hesitated to inflict punishment and to eliminate the problem and any scrap of warlike attitudes in them.
Even before the Romans conquered Britain, there were constant petty quarrels and wars between tribes. The people of Britain were divided under chieftains and rarely at peace.
The enforced peace of the Romans, though not free, brought more order than anything that was previously common to the British tribes. Yet it was always important that acts of retaliation by the Romans were justifiable to an extent. For when oppression increased, the Britons were more likely to rebel in protest.
Indeed, Agricola demonstrated his knowledge of this by changing his methods of governance for the best outcome.
In the words of Tacticus, Agricola realised that “little was accomplished by force if injustice followed.” Therefore, he erased any reason for war, lessening the native's motives and attempting to content them with ease, peace and pleasure. Although the solution as to how the British were kept peaceful and content required a difficult balance of force and ease, those who did managed it successfully, fostered a relationship that was mostly one of goodwill between the Romans and Britons.
Mercy for the Submissive
When dealing with the natives who were submissive, Rome used fair and merciful methods to control them.
As conquered people, the Britons would never have full mastery over their lives, they would always be under a foreign emperor's authority. Yet legislation dealing with Roman subjects implies that the state was far from unconcerned about their wellbeing.
In some instances, from Tacitus' account of wars and campaigns in Britain, Generals or Governors often displayed mercy to those who surrendered and submitted. Once Tacticus describes how friendly relations were at once established between Caesar and the natives, as the latter came offering hostages in acceptance of the empire's rule.
There were many wars between the two, yet when the natives surrendered, they were generally treated with respect.
Citizenship in Roman Britain
The Romans were open to the Britons accepting citizenship and becoming more like Romans and this gave the Britons better opportunities.
Some of the most common ways to become a citizen were to serve in the Roman military or to become a magistrate.
By law, Roman citizenship allowed the Britains to be known as fully Roman. Citizenship was not determined by ethnicity but was a position of superior standing that was available for anyone to attain. Later, a new status was formed, citizenship without a vote. They shared responsibilities and enjoyed most of the rights, except for involvement in politics. This gave provincials even easier access to citizenship.
Although citizenship was an honour and a privilege, Rome used it to its advantage as it was a way to increase its power and remove enemies.
Roman citizenship was available to many of the Britons, and this gave the state and its province a more equal relationship.
Power Imbalances
However, because of power, the relationship between Rome and Britain was always unequal.
Even with the control the British elite had over their provinces, the relationship between them and the state was not equal. The Roman state held all the power and if contributions were made by citizens that did not align with Roman will, then favour would be retained from them.
The Britons were subjects of Rome and did not wield the same level of power as the Roman state. Because of Rome’s authority and power to command it was always dominant over Britain.
Cultural Integration
Although the Romans would have promoted and encouraged the adoption of their culture by the natives, there was no policy that enforced the acceptance of Roman culture on Britannia's natives.
Many of the Britons did gradually adopt certain Roman customs and culture. The elite were especially fascinated with Roman culture because of the benefits it could give them.
As asserted by Tacticus in his life of Agricola, many of the Britons slowly exchanged their culture and way of living for the luxurious lives of Romans.
In Eskines' book on imperialism, he states that it was possible for the provinces of Britain to preserve their local and ethnic identity while also being invested in the vast empire of Rome.
The level of acceptance of Roman culture differed from region to region yet it became extraordinarily popular due to its convenience and comfort.
Did Britain Benefit?
From the Roman’s perspective, the natives of Britannia benefited in many ways from Rome's conquest. Tacitus refers to the Britons as primitive and barbaric, reckless, high-spirited and wild, as did many Romans of the time.
They saw the native people’s lives as miserable, wild and comfortless, with a society that was much less advanced and sophisticated than their own.
Therefore, from the Roman perspective conquest of Britannia was highly advantageous for the Britons. Some of the valuable benefits that Romans brought to Britain were education, art, music, laws, peace, citizenship and security, pleasure, safety and comfort. Also, infrastructure like aqueducts, architecture, roads, plumbing and sanitation.
These important developments eventually transformed Britannia and converted it into one of the greatest empires of all time. Civilization impacted the connection between Rome and Britain as both cultures interacted.
Rome and Britain's relationship was complex because of the variety of different people on both sides who held contrasting views and values.
The way these two countries connected and behaved toward each other gives important insight into human nature and the essence of power and control. The methods Rome used to maintain its empire affected the British province and changed the way our world is today.
Bibliography
Erskine, Andrew. “Roman Imperialism.” Edinburgh University Press, 2010. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g0b4hr. pp. 14-86. Accessed 9 Sept. 2024.
Goodman, Martin. “The Roman World 44 BC-AD 180.” 2nd edition. Florence: Routledge, 2013. pp. 145-239. Accessed 20 Aug. 2024
Mattingly, David J. “Imperialism, Power, and Identity: Experiencing the Roman Empire.” Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/heb40203.0001.001. pp. 6-11. Accessed 9 Sept. 2024.
Tacitus. “Agricola. Germania. Dialogue on Oratory.” Translated by M. Hutton, W. Peterson. Revised by R. M. Ogilvie, E. H. Warmington, Michael Winterbottom. Loeb Classical Library 35. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914. pp. 49-79. Accessed 9 Sept. 2024.
Tacitus “Annals.” Translated by J. Jackson, Camb. Mass.: Harvard University Press 1937. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/e/roman/texts/tacitus/annals/14b*.html. pp. 161-209. Accessed 12 Aug. 2024.
Comments