Roman Iceland : Effects if Any?????????

[Sissco]

Isn't Iceland much smaller than Britain? Isnt iceland close to the North Pole? surely the romans, if they'd used all their resources, would've managed to conquer the WHOLE of Scotland and sail North wards and taken the whole of Iceland? Surely Iceland wasn't THAT heavily populated? All the Romans would really have needed to do was export loads of Romans from Rome itself, in such numbers that they'd out number the native people of Iceland? Also I'm thinking Could'nt the Romans have saied a little Further north onto the outer fringes of the North pole and made one or two small settlements there, or would that have been impossible???

Sissco

 

[Ferrell]

Isn't Iceland much smaller than Britain? Isnt iceland close to the North Pole? surely the romans, if they'd used all their resources, would've managed to conquer the WHOLE of Scotland and sail North wards and taken the whole of Iceland? Surely Iceland wasn't THAT heavily populated? All the Romans would really have needed to do was export loads of Romans from Rome itself, in such numbers that they'd out number the native people of Iceland? Also I'm thinking Could'nt the Romans have saied a little Further north onto the outer fringes of the North pole and made one or two small settlements there, or would that have been impossible???

Sissco

In OTL the Vikings colonized an up-to-then empty Iceland. I think that if there was a Roman Icelandic colony, it would have been the decendents of a trade/fishing fleet blown off course. I don't believe there are any large trees native to Iceland, so no new ships could be built. Later, when the Vikings landed, there would be some strife, but eventually the Romans would get assimulated into the Viking culture. The major effect would be sagas we don't have in OTL.

 

[carlton_bach]

Isn't Iceland much smaller than Britain? Isnt iceland close to the North Pole? surely the romans, if they'd used all their resources, would've managed to conquer the WHOLE of Scotland and sail North wards and taken the whole of Iceland? Surely Iceland wasn't THAT heavily populated? All the Romans would really have needed to do was export loads of Romans from Rome itself, in such numbers that they'd out number the native people of Iceland? Also I'm thinking Could'nt the Romans have saied a little Further north onto the outer fringes of the North pole and made one or two small settlements there, or would that have been impossible???

I'm afraid you're thinking twentieth-century style here. If you had put the resources of the Roman Empire behind an effort to conquer lands unknown, they would have reached America before the death of Tiberius and probably met the Tang halfway down the Amur. But that's not how the Roman Empire worked. Conquest was an extremely problematic undertaking legally, because you needed justification, politically, because military glory traditionally founded claims to leadership and that wasn't something emperors liked to encourage, economically, because the people were not that happy top pay the taxes it cost and above all expected peace and protection from the center in return for obedience and deference, and logistically, because it had to be done on the cheap. Add to that the absence of a tradition of discovery and that such efforts tended to not pay except in terms on knowledge, the risk of embarrassing defeats (losing a fleet because you don't know how tidal mudflats work tends to do bad things to deference) and simple disinterest. No Roman would have planted the vexillum in Iceland because it was there.

 

[Sissco]

Sorry I did'nt mean to think in 21st century terms and I didn't think it was IMPOSSIBLE for even a simple Roman to get a boat from either Northern Gaul or North west Britainia (North west England) and sail all the way to Iceland! this Roman did not have to be working for the Government in Rome to have got a boat and sailed to Iceland.....just get off his own back and try it!!!

BTW is there any real historical evidence that any Romans visited Iceland? And Am I correct in saying that the North Pole is not that far away from Iceland???

sissco

 

[Zyzzyva]

Sorry I did'nt mean to think in 21st century terms and I didn't think it was IMPOSSIBLE for even a simple Roman to get a boat from either Northern Gaul or North west Britainia (North west England) and sail all the way to Iceland! this Roman did not have to be working for the Government in Rome to have got a boat and sailed to Iceland.....just get off his own back and try it!!!

BTW is there any real historical evidence that any Romans visited Iceland? And Am I correct in saying that the North Pole is not that far away from Iceland???

sissco

I don't think there's any evidence they got there, no. And it is relatively close (~2500 km) but they're the tough 2500 km.

 

[Sissco]

Sorry for the silly question, but I take it that there's no people living in the North pole and I mean the edge of the North pole? Surely that far south in the North pole, there's bound to be poor quality grass for people to have a few sheep? Isn't that how the vikings later lived in Greenland? Again sorry for the silly questions but I wanna develope this senario better!


I LOVE THIS SITE!!!!

sissco

 

[carlton_bach]

Sorry I did'nt mean to think in 21st century terms and I didn't think it was IMPOSSIBLE for even a simple Roman to get a boat from either Northern Gaul or North west Britainia (North west England) and sail all the way to Iceland! this Roman did not have to be working for the Government in Rome to have got a boat and sailed to Iceland.....just get off his own back and try it!!!

BTW is there any real historical evidence that any Romans visited Iceland? And Am I correct in saying that the North Pole is not that far away from Iceland???

There is no evidence, but it is far from impossible. We do not know exactly what Pytheas described when he wrote of 'Thule' - interpretations vary between Norway, the Faeroes, the Hebrides, or Iceland. The problem is to find a reason for the Romans to go and, more importantly, to stay there. A single ship can alwas be blown off course and, with luck, make it home, but of there isn't anything worth going there for, that's all it will be.

The North Pole itself is just pack ice that can't be settled, so the closes you could come is Iceland, Greenland, Spitsbergen, Jan Mayen and Svalbard. IMO the only places reasonably suitable for iron age settlement would be Iceland and Greenland (Roman settler technology would borrow heavily from Gaul and Britain and would look a lot like later Viking stuff).

 

[Sissco]

Cartlon,

Thank you......HOw far from Britain is Iceland anyway? Just wondered?

sissco

 

[Mikey]

Once a Roman ship found Iceland once, would they realisitically be able to return? There aren't a lot of landmarks on the way.

But even if it couldn't create a real settlement, is it possible that the Roman Empire would have a few citizens who made it to Iceland, and then told just enough stories to really develop the legends of Thule? Enough stories of volcanoes and geysers could change Roman mythology quite a bit - could early Christians have imagined hell then, based on something like what they'd heard of Thule?

 

[Umbral]

Isn't Iceland much smaller than Britain? Isnt iceland close to the North Pole? surely the romans, if they'd used all their resources, would've managed to conquer the WHOLE of Scotland and sail North wards and taken the whole of Iceland? Surely Iceland wasn't THAT heavily populated? All the Romans would really have needed to do was export loads of Romans from Rome itself, in such numbers that they'd out number the native people of Iceland? Also I'm thinking Could'nt the Romans have saied a little Further north onto the outer fringes of the North pole and made one or two small settlements there, or would that have been impossible???

Sissco

Iceland is south of the arctic circle. It is about as close to the north pole as the middle of Alaska. At the time of the Romans, it was totally empty of people.
It was also utterly empty of anything the Romans would have wanted. I can see them getting there, but there does not seem to be anything that would bring them back.

The North pole is floating pack ice about 10-20 feet thick. No grass or plants.

Possibly refugees from an extremly vicious power struggle? But there needs to be some reason why they wouldn't go to another urban civilization.

 

[Mike Stearns]

Possibly refugees from an extremly vicious power struggle? But there needs to be some reason why they wouldn't go to another urban civilization.

Easy. They are declared Enemies of Rome and are accordingly denied fire and shelter. As a result they flee to Iceland.

 

[Sissco]

Easy. They are declared Enemies of Rome and are accordingly denied fire and shelter. As a result they flee to Iceland.

Mike, you are a very very smart person....I would never have thought of that...well done!

Easy. They are declared Enemies of Rome and are accordingly denied fire and shelter. As a result they flee to Iceland.

.....and as a result the Romans who feld Rome as enimies of the state, multiply and build up their numbers! They get used to the climate of Iceland, which isn't much different to Britain, and as a result they thrive there and when the vikings arrive, they see loads of Roman looking people! I think i'm beginning to see how this senario could pan out!!!

sissco

 

[carlton_bach]

Easy. They are declared Enemies of Rome and are accordingly denied fire and shelter. As a result they flee to Iceland.

What's wrong with the Parthian Empire or Armenia? Even Meroe or Ireland would be better. Iceland would make the perfect island prison for exiled enemies, except that it is just too far away to guard properly, but I can't see anyone in his right mind wating to go there. It is telling that the Irish monks who first settled it went there for solitude, suffering and privation. It's what the place had in spades.

 

[Sissco]

I thought Iceland was not too differnt in climate and weather to Britain??? It's not THAT far away!!!!!! I thought Iceland would get more snow in winter than Britain and less sunshine than Britain in summer and that's a bout it! Don't forget it was possible to grow grapes in scotland so surely you could grow food there at that time!!!

sissco

 

[Mike Stearns]

What's wrong with the Parthian Empire or Armenia? Even Meroe or Ireland would be better. Iceland would make the perfect island prison for exiled enemies, except that it is just too far away to guard properly, but I can't see anyone in his right mind wating to go there. It is telling that the Irish monks who first settled it went there for solitude, suffering and privation. It's what the place had in spades.

Who says you have to guard them though? Perhaps the Romans decide to intitute transportation as a punishment. They decide to allow the prisoners to govern themselves and provide a contingent troops to maintain order. In order to prevent escapes, the only ships allowed to go to Iceland are Roman naval vessels.

 

[carlton_bach]

Who says you have to guard them though? Perhaps the Romans decide to intitute transportation as a punishment. They decide to allow the prisoners to govern themselves and provide a contingent troops to maintain order. In order to prevent escapes, the only ships allowed to go to Iceland are Roman naval vessels.

That's positively humane by Roman standards. Island exile was for people you might want back at some point, or you couldn't conveniently kill outright. Your average convict either faced penal enslavement and hard labour for the (brief) remainder of his natural life, or an inventive death in the arena. I can't see where this scheme would appeal to the Romans. They didn't have a bourgeois-style crime problem. It might be an option in a Roman Empire that hasd undergone population growth and comfortably fills much of Europe, where labour is in surplus and pepole want criminals away from them.

 

[carlton_bach]

I thought Iceland was not too differnt in climate and weather to Britain??? It's not THAT far away!!!!!! I thought Iceland would get more snow in winter than Britain and less sunshine than Britain in summer and that's a bout it! Don't forget it was possible to grow grapes in scotland so surely you could grow food there at that time!!!

Iceland is very different from Britain. Climatically, it's closer to Northern Norway (by comparison, even the Hebrides are downright nice). At the time of first settlement, there was forest cover in some parts, but that quickly degraded under the impact of relatively small herds of goats and sheep. The ecosystem is fragile and the resources very limited. The only things it has in abundance are land, fish, and hot water.

 

[Mike Stearns]

That's positively humane by Roman standards. Island exile was for people you might want back at some point, or you couldn't conveniently kill outright. Your average convict either faced penal enslavement and hard labour for the (brief) remainder of his natural life, or an inventive death in the arena. I can't see where this scheme would appeal to the Romans. They didn't have a bourgeois-style crime problem. It might be an option in a Roman Empire that hasd undergone population growth and comfortably fills much of Europe, where labour is in surplus and pepole want criminals away from them.

Ok, so how about a POD where the Romans adopt Athenian-style ostracisism.

 

[Dan1988]

Iceland is very different from Britain. Climatically, it's closer to Northern Norway (by comparison, even the Hebrides are downright nice). At the time of first settlement, there was forest cover in some parts, but that quickly degraded under the impact of relatively small herds of goats and sheep. The ecosystem is fragile and the resources very limited. The only things it has in abundance are land, fish, and hot water.

Hmm, except for the hot water bit, why does that sound familiar to my neck of the woods?

Another thing that could be in the back of people's minds: if somehow (without the assistance of ASBs) some Romans were able to get to Iceland, communication might become a problem. Since these Romans would be far away from "civilization", it could be very likely that Vulgar Latin (that is, the spoken register that is different from the written Classical form) dominates, and we could end up with a bunch of illiterate Romans whose language might deviate further from the rest of the Romance languages (then again, as the case of Icelandic, the most conservative of all the Scandinavian languages, demonstrates, it could also be likely that "Icelandic Romance" might also retain archaisms that have long since been discarded by the other Romance languages, with the possible exception in some areas of Romanian). Because of this, communication is going to be a huge problem, since (back then) Iceland was pretty much isolated from the rest of Europe. Thus, if news of the outside world entered Iceland, how would it be possible to communicate this news if the sender and the receiver speak different languages?

Just my two cents.

 

[Dan1988]

Oh, and BTW - how are you going to get women over to Iceland? If you want a surviving population of Romans to exist during the age of the voyages of the Norsemen, somehow you're going to need women who "knew" men - in the Biblical sense - in order to have a surviving population.