Why didn't Rome Conquer Germania?

[@AliothAncalagon]

Imagine fighting fierce tribes in hardly passable forrests every step on your way and when you eventually "conquer" an enemy headquarter its just a hill with 5 shacks on it. Germania was the perfect combo of being both tough to beat militarily and economically totally worthless to conquer.

[@eddiep7444]

Similar to Russia throughout history

[@rickrozen2341]

Romaboo cope

[@yannickmussche5068]

That is not how the fight happened. The documentary is wrong. For instance, one moment, after a three days of fighting while slowly moving to open ground where they would defeat the germans easily, they left the army truss. When the barbarians found these treasures, they almost stayed their with their treasury, cause they already lost so much more men than the romans. It was Arminius again that could convince them to leave the riches behind and start to hunt the romans down again. They were really not though to beat military.

[@rickrozen2341]

@@yannickmussche5068 Romaboo coping at its best

[@AliothAncalagon]

@@yannickmussche5068 Three days of fighting? Whatever your source is, if it seriously claims that the ambush lasted 3 days it should be considered a myth that you should only take with a massive pinch of salt.

[@uhbaoifuhoiafj456]

When Arminius got accused that he would betray Varus he actually said that this is true but everyone took this as a joke. Sometimes the best lie is the truth.

[@scintillam_dei]

Truth can't be a lie though, so he was deceptive without lying.

[@sparkyfromel]

@@scintillam_dei.... an old trope is that there is ten ways of lying , only one is purely a lie the nine others are a crafty mix

[@scintillam_dei]

@@paprskomet Roman writers said that northern savages had remarkable height and light colours, yet people in many cases depict the early ancient Romans as light-eyed with brown hair making them look just like Goths. Even the Barbarian series is inaccurate. At least they don't have a cringetastic English mispronunciation of Latin more cringetastic than the word cringetastic.

[@MarkVrem]

@@scintillam_dei at least Cringetastic is pronounced with a hard K, so kind of Latin.

[@uhbaoifuhoiafj456]

@@scintillam_dei Never heared about stylistic devices?

[@bethmarriott9292]

Augustus just whacking his head against the wall in frustration is one of the most relatable things he ever did

[@dfjanus8014]

its v likely seutonius said that for dramatic effect lol... from what we know abt augustus he was the last person on earth to behave like that... im guessing seutonius was trying to get across that augustus was PISSED

[@lordsiomai]

Indeed. Who knew Augustus was so relatable

[@lovingmontasoccer]

And the most disrespectfull thing what he has done to Varus! A real leader would had made a proper burial! The spartan culture was harsher but i believe they had more passion and respect!

[@bravomike4734]

@Amadeus Gaming Was Julius first or Augustus?

[@kaushikvsmaniyan]

@@bravomike4734 Good point. I'd say Julius was the first, paving the way for the Princepe

[@giannb5145]

When you think about it, the Romans actually conquered all of today's Austria and Switzerland and around 30% of today's Germany. In western and southern Germany, many well-known cities actually began as Roman forts or colonies. Examples: Cologne (Colonia Agrippina), Regensburg (Castra Regina), Mainz (Mogontiacum), Augsburg (Augusta Vindelicorum), Trier (Augusta Treverorum).

[@manzanasrojas6984]

Yeah, its common knowledge they basically conquered everything up to the Rhine

[@Icetea-2000]

Well yeah, but germanic tribes (which the romans generalized as Germania) back then extended a lot farther eastward

[@Icetea-2000]

@@smartacus88 I don’t know whether you’re referring to central asia because of indo-aryans or caucasians (which is arguably europe), however this is not entirely accurate unless we go back all the way to the settling of europe by the homo sapiens. Since we came from africa, and had to cross asia to get to europe by land, it’s kind of a given that europeans sort of came from asia but that’s so unrelated and so far in the past that it basically doesn’t matter and isn’t a satisfying conclusion. And whites aren’t just germanics I would say, but I don’t know because the American definition for whites is so convoluted at this point

[@Icetea-2000]

@@smartacus88 Really what they should just do is refer to every ethnicity individually instead of "white" and "black", it only makes racial problems worse. And it’s also just better to be more accurate

[@madkills10]

@@smartacus88 Slavic is nothing like Italian or Greek

[@benyseus6325]

And then years later the Germanics would be one of the primal catalysts in the fall of the Western Roman Empire, so good job Varus I guess.

[@angelb.823]

And centuries later, Germanics (or Franks to that regard) would have the privilege of entitling themselves Romans by the Pope.

[@doyouevenpraise189]

Well not exactly, The the Visigoths just give the already broken and crumbling Roman Empire the last Hit. Economic troubles and overreliance on slave labor. The rise of the Eastern Empire. Overexpansion and military overspending. Government corruption and political instability. The arrival of the Huns and the migration of the Barbarian tribes. Weakening of the Roman legions Christianity and the loss of traditional values constant Invasions by Barbarian tribes the frequent civil wars. Time, no empire rule forever. This were some of the main reasons the Western Roman Empire fell

[@rockyrakovica603]

@@doyouevenpraise189 yes the complete answer western rome more or less killed itself

[@Ditka-89]

@@doyouevenpraise189 so essentially the same criteria for the fall of the American Empire

[@Apollo1989V]

Only because the Huns started pushing them.

[@bulldowozer5858]

"As Tiberius was now busy in the Balcans" Some thing just never change

[@bcjmythical9576]

As the UN is busy with Tiberius...

[@hoppeltrottel7484]

The Balcans - causing trouble for major european powers since 6 B.C. (at least).

[@iadertina]

Yes. The famous rebellion of two Batons (Illyrian military leaders, who opposed massive inscriptions of Illyrians in Roman army) played great role.

[@justinallen2408]

The real trouble was not ending their leadership and installing new roman ones in their place over there

[@karlmuller3690]

@@justinallen2408 - KILL ALL THE RULING CLASSES ... seems like a good idea !! When do we START??

[@tonyhawk94]

Very light explanation... 1 - Romans did have two Germanic provinces "Germania inferior" and "superior" That are here showed as "Gauls" Which it wasn't. 2 - Keep in mind that Germania magna was low in population, a huge swamp with no real economic or geopolitic interest 3 - All that while the center of power and economy was the Mediterranean sea. 4 - With many rivlaries and bigger problems to deal elsewhere in the frontiers than wasting time, men and money invading this land

[@patttrick]

spoil sport

[@jorehir]

Indeed. Also, Rome suffered many worse defeats, and yet always kept on fighting until the end, if there was a reason to. There was no reason to keep on fighting Germania. The balance between costs and benefits did not favor a new campaign. Of course, in hindsight, a conquest of Germania would have avoided the Germanic migrations of the 5th century... But nobody can blame the Romans of the 1st century for not anticipating that.

[@thegrumpyraccoon]

No it wouldn't, because many of those migrations started further east. The only thing that would happen is earlier contact with Huns or some other nomadic nation and that's not a good idea.

[@Cloud-dq1mr]

So basically, since they wanted to conquer Germania but couldn't they resorted to all your presented arguments as the reason to leave it be.

[@jorehir]

@@Cloud-dq1mr It's simple: if a new territory can give you 100, to achieve a net gain you must spend less than 100 for its conquest. With those 3 lost legions and other campaigns, the Romans were approaching said 100 threeshold, such that another campaign might have made the conquest of Germania Magna not convenient. Same goes for the Kush Kingdom. Rome renounced to its conquest, so some people claim that Rome (of the 1st century) didn't have the power to conquer it... Ridiculous.

[@MaisuBirb]

I live at the exact place, Neuwied, where Caesar built his first Rhine Bridge in 55 BC. It is also the same area where we kicked the Vikings out over 900 years later when they sacked everything downstream up to around Andernach and Neuwied. There are a LOT of historical ruins, towers, museums and information to just soak up in and it got me highly invested into more ancient history and a bit of archaeology. My first town I lived in, Mülheim-Kärlich over 20 years ago, which had just behind our garages a fully uncovered ruin of a Roman Villa. I would go there daily and hop around the former walls and just be in awe, even at a young age. Sadly it has recently fallen victim to vandalism and is no longer open to the public.

[@devin3201]

Ja moin, grüße aus Koblenz

[@FrozenArt337]

͜( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[@corbeau-_-]

and because their armies suffered overwhelming losses against a small village in Gaul, led by Asterix and Obelix.

[@pedromdrveiga9777]

😂

[@1337-Nathaniel]

@Ronnie and I have you read the comics? They're great!!

[@AndreasGaarder]

@@1337-Nathaniel They are available in Latin. "Delirant, isti Romani!" (Asterix beating up legionary)

[@lisztdylan7846]

@Ronnie and I the comics were everything, growing up in Luxembourg I had a collection of all the old asterix et Obélix co'icz

[@hb9145]

Yeah, I read that in a book.

[@adder95]

Germany was probably very heavily forested at that time (it still has a lot today), making it very difficult to explore

[@derkelch2228]

I love the german forests so much I like my country but sometimes our politicians are a bit silly but when you look at the whole country and conpare it with other countries you see that Germany is not bad at all

[@ianmelon484]

@@ericziqn7019 it doesn't matter if nobody asked, people can say whatever they want to at any time

[@mikeguce7959]

Not only heavily forested,there is so many hills and mountains,that a roman legion will find difficult not just on travelling but fighting... The roman legion were mostly reliant on their siege weapons and foot soldiers,the romans have very few cavalry force...

[@gunnigasig9084]

Look at the standard cammo of the Bundeswehr (the German Army). Forests still give a huge impact on Germanys landscape. 👍🏻

[@Soloknechter]

That is not really the case. The untouched forests of course were deep and overgrown but those near settlements were actually quite thin. While there were huge trees there was not much understory since the germans sent their livestock into the forests to feed on seeds and smaller plants

[@ingaz6565]

There is a large part missing from this video. Marcus Aurelius would later fight a series of battles against the Germanic tribes, defeating them but his death put a halt to the drive north into Germania. His son Commodus decided (against his fathers advisors) to instead make peace with the tribes. This would prove a costly mistake as centuries later it was these tribes among others that would invade the western roman empire and lead to its downfall.

[@NazriB]

Lies again? Army's Largest Fleet

[@muxmurki1497]

what was so bad about that? Empires have to fall. Greetings to Brandon, btw.

[@iceswallow7717]

idk if conquering Germania wouldve stopped Attila, but the real reason Rome fell was bcz of the instability from succession civil wars and plagues in the third century.

[@nicholasscott5905]

Is that the guy from Spartacus whose son raped some slave chick and Caesar but then got tent poled by the rebels

[@broadcasttttable]

So how did the battle scene at the beginning of "Gladiator" fit into all this?

[@3.2Carrera]

When you go to Germany today and stand on the banks of the Rhine, it's just so formidable. If you're outnumbered and stretched thin by the requirements of a large empire, it turned out to be the only way they could defend their borders.

[@hardwing]

It is worth mentioning, that Rome was very much a mediteran civilisation. Its major centers of population and economy lay there. This is also one of the reasons Britain was conquered so late. The Rhine was just a great border, but to really subdue all German tribes they would have needed to expand to the Vistula ... a logistic nightmare and an invitation to the horse tribes of the plain.

[@christianfreedom-seeker2025]

All Rome had to do was unite all of the Germanic Tribes under a Kaiser who would then be subject to Rome. This is what I would have done: Find a strong warrior chieftain, arm him with Roman weapons and send him on a conquest of all Germania. After he beats his last enemies, give him enough gold to build a magnificent city and a system of forts or castles to hold the empire together. There, Rome could have had a protected “back door” and they could have taken on the Persians, make them also into a vassal state.

[@EmilReiko]

@@christianfreedom-seeker2025 the social organization of the germanic tribes, both within and between would have made such a despot an impossibility, sure he might conquer alot - but his entire empire would fall apart the moment he died, as all loyalty was sworn directly onto him... Also kings or warleaders were appointed by tribal strongmen when needed and operated under constraint... Any gemanic ruler who too openly wen't against the traditional structuring of power, would very fast find himself a human saccrifice in one of those swamps

[@BrightWendigo]

@@christianfreedom-seeker2025 ah yes, create your own German vlad the impaler😂

[@samuelbishop1701]

​@@christianfreedom-seeker2025 Wouldn't work. It sounds like a good idea in theory since it was actually done before to my knowledge in non German speaking places. That said, Germanic tribes of their era had a culture of backstabbing the man at the top of the hill. There's every chance the man you put in charge will just spit in your face after he's suceeded, And then he's even more dangerous than your previous enemy. Because they're German and not Roman, the soldiers will continue listening to him

[@MicroageHD]

Scotland was never conquered right?

[@erikt1713]

Actually, they conquered a nice chunk of Germania and founded cities there such as Cologne, still the fourth largest city in today's Germany. They also traded a lot with Germania and made several incursions. Every empire must end somewhere and this is just where the border was. An empire cannot overstretch itself, either.

[@erikt1713]

@Eff dees - These areas are heavily populated, but I agree that they never conquered the heart of Germania. Of course, it's tough to compare to today's states and the Roman geographers were not so sure either where Germania should end in the East. East of river Elbe the people were culturally different, that's for sure. From the structure of villages those were recognizable as Slavic. The expansion of German-speaking people all the way to the Baltic states was only in the Middle Ages.

[@aoki6332]

@@erikt1713 what they mean when they say when not conquering Germania is they stopped at the Rhine not going more than that

[@ghost91698]

It clearly shows in the video what you said. It seems like you didn’t watch the video. No reason to say actually when the video states what you said.

[@embreis2257]

well, Cologne and a number of other cities well known today are on the left bank of the river Rhine and therefore in Roman territory. however, the map shown in this video does not cover all Roman territory in what is known as Germania. The river Danube was another frontier and the land south of the Danube was occupied by Rome for a long time

[@enricomanno8434]

Plus Magonza..Treviri Etc etc

[@logankite1226]

Gotta respect the Germans and their resilience throughout history.

[@RageCage1701]

It was less German resiliency and more the Romans determining at a grand strategic level that it wasn't worth their time. We can debate the wisdom of that determination.

[@MagicButterz]

@@myrnaa1077 they weren't barbarians

[@Uthandol]

@@myrnaa1077 lol, cope and seethe afrikan. cope and seethe

[@Uthandol]

@@RageCage1701 germans were better. now rome is a dusty memory and germany is the strongest country in europe even after losing two world wars.

[@thepatrusnostor5794]

​​@@Uthandol At this time Germany was a piece of trash. Imagine being a Roman and spending money fighting barbarians who live in huts among the trees in a swamp drinking mead.

[@Tom-lk6om]

Hey guys I'm from "Kreis Lippe" and we are Arminen and still very proud of Arminius. We have a football club called after Arminius (Arminia Bielefeld) and we have a huge monument for him too. (Herrmanns Denkmal)

[@fireheat8738]

That's very Barbari

[@Tom-lk6om]

@@Sam-pie yeah thats the question but he defents this region and the people that lived here from the enemies. It's a matter of perspective in this case.

[@davidstolle1696]

Die hauptschlacht war jedoch im Kreis Osnabrück bei kalkriese. The Main Battle was Not in lippe it was in kalkriese near by Osnabrück

[@stratman9449]

@@Sam-pie why..are you a roman or a viking.....??...:-)

[@sicnarf6971]

@@Sam-pie What a stupid statement. Protecting your homeland from invaders is something to be proud of.

[@funnycat1957]

The Roman historian Tacitus answers the question raised by this video in four Latin words:"coercendum intra terminos imperium" (restraining the Empire within its boundaries) to describe the policy of the emperor Augustus at the end of his life and that of his successor Tiberius. Contrary to Alexander the Great of Macedon, the Romans realised that conquering is one thing, pacifying and building a lasting civil administration another thing which was equally important (I think they learnt that lesson after the Second Punic War when they saw how easily their Italian and Sicilian allies would desert if given a chance,as Capua, Syracuse etc had gone over to Carthage.

[@TheWhiskyDelta]

Provinces were only ineffecient under the empire, due to it's need to centralise and control, as well as its fear of competent governors and generals who would be rivals to the throne. Under the republic provinces were massively cash positive, in great part due to the fact that they could just assign talent to solve problems.

[@josephgoodwin3863]

They were conquered, hence the Holy Roman Empire.

[@viktor8928]

Also, Tacitus said Germania was a region "hideous and rude, under a rigorous climate, dismal to behold or to cultivate". Also, "silver and gold the Gods have denied them, whether in mercy or in wrath, I am unable to determine".

[@myrnaa1077]

@@viktor8928Agreed. All these conversations and reasons why rome didnt conquer and rule germania can be summed up in one single expression. If you conquer stupid net-negative areas for stupid reasons, the quicker your empire will dissolve. The Romans absolutely could, if they neglect more important things that are attributing to the empires longevity, influence, and legacy. No one knew the northern reaches would be a problem until much later centuries; and even if they conquered germania, once again, then that negligence to the other more important and powerful areas (of any kind) that need more importantly be attended to.. would have dissolved the roman empire in the early 400 AD in example, rather than later (i.e. another more powerful enemy not being stopped from growing to be ignored, in order to ignorantly conquer all of unprofitable germania, would have been the germania of the later stages of the roman empire).

[@funnycat1957]

@@viktor8928 Good point, there was not much economic incentive to invade Germania.

[@arcomegis9999]

Total War: Rome II actually did its best to recreate the factions. The threat of Germanic tribes is implemented in also Aurelian's reconquest whilst besieged on all sides. Even the tribes in Pannonia , former Dacian territory, now Goths pose a threat.

[@erzar.1730]

5:04 now THAT'S what I call foreshadowing

[@petertraurig5728]

5:00 "He payed special attention to the Eruscus tribe" is an understatement. He straight up kidnapped the leaders kids and braught them up himself in Rome.

[@jacksnyder7318]

The crucial factor for the continuation of any nation regardless of it's affinities is leadership. The Romans lost their commitment to merit advancement and gave into political and nepotism pressures. This has been the downfall of every empire and nation state, resulting in the poorest of choices in military leadership and civil monetary decisions. This is happening today and will tomorrow, human nature is always corrupt.

[@cautarepvp2079]

Same thing is Happening to American empire? Give example.. China is the next big boss no?

[@iche9373]

Oh, you explain the fall of the Roman Empire, a complex entity of several thousand years, with ONLY one decisive factor. Man, you are super intelligent. Who are you? Professor Einstein?

[@lovingmontasoccer]

We can clearly see how pathetic the politicians are today!

[@warmak4576]

Hahhaaha, hahaha, oh you rly think there's another solution then violence? Let me laugh even Harder Hahahah

[@Loriensen]

@@iche9373 I suppose he did enumerate the problems on the surface, that does make sense if you look back at the history of many nations committing themselves to this repetitive nature, though I'm sure there are more depths that contributed to the downfall of the Romans that might not have been written down, so we could only speculate those that we could discover.

[@HistoryOfRevolutions]

Thucydides once stated: "War is an evil thing; but to submit to the dictation of other states is worse.... Freedom, if we hold fast to it, will ultimately restore our losses, but submission will mean permanent loss of all that we value.... To you who call yourselves men of peace, I say: You are not safe unless you have men of action on your side"

[@LKaramazov]

The feminists who are running our country into the ground will soon discover this to all our cost.

[@emib6599]

You can do that even better, you can wage war against your free country for achieving the freedom to submit to foreign rule. Freedom is a completely arbitrary concept this is why this pompous old phrase don't have sense and they can be re used by everyone without any real meaning.

[@scintillam_dei]

Suicides once said: "If anyone dares make a joke using this stupid name, they should consider suicide."

[@laniedulay4043]

Overextension and not as much as centralized kingdoms as gaul.

[@filiptalimdzioski7281]

bad admin tech got him

[@dorycarol3170]

@@filiptalimdzioski7281 AE is too high

[@australiananarchist480]

I mean Gaul wasn't exactly centralised either

[@Ec-yx8gz]

Coalition war

[@BatCostumeGuy]

@@australiananarchist480 Atleast it had enough tribes to control the whole territory under Rome.

[@Nachtrot]

I live in Köln Deutz (part of Colonia Claudia Ara Agrippinensium). It's a pity that we have lost so many roman artifacts. At least some pieces of the wall are still there.

[@phlm9038]

Due to too many bombings during WW2.

[@Rondo2ooo]

​@PHL M Nope, a lot still exists, because Roman remainings are often underground. And there is still plenty of it. If you are interested, take one of the historical city tours with a historian guide. They are done throughout the year and there are many interesting facts.

[@dnocturn84]

Be aware: this video is quite inaccurate! Consider it to be more fun and entertainment than any kind of valid information! There is an error regarding what is called "Gaul" and with this an massive error regarding "conquering Germania" in general. This kind of violates what this video is all about though... The territories right next (left of) to the Rhine were already German tribe territories, not Gaul territories by any means, like what the narrator is talking about on multiple occations. These territories were called "Germania Superior" and "Germania Inferior" and were actually German tribe lands which were conquered by the Romans. This means, that quite a number of Germans were living under Roman rule at this point in time. This feature is quite significant when talking about the Varus battle (and their part in the fall of Rome, but the video doesn't go that far). Gaul territory surprisingly ends a lot further to the west, than what the map is showing or what the narrator is telling us about. It was the larger "Germania Magna" to the right of the Rhine (but also a bit further east, than what the map shows), that the Romans "failed" to conquer. This video also misses the opportunity to mention the "Limes" border defence installation, the second largest in the world in size, after the Chinese Wall. This was build by the Romans to protect themselves from the German tribes living in Germania Magna.

[@wendellthomas179]

Thanks for the information....these videos that are narrated by the author or whatever, always, always are f****** flawed...😀😳👎🏾👎🏾👀

[@dnocturn84]

@@wendellthomas179 It's a shame in my opinion. Because the video quality, animation (ok, there isn't that much, but better than some other videos out there) and narrator voice all seem pretty appealing to me. Sucks, that he ignores so much about this topic. Unfortunately, the level of misinformation is way to high, that you can't count is as "simplified" or " in a nutshell" kind of video. Watch other videos instead or search for "Germania Superior", "Germania Inferior", Germanic tribes and the Romans, or whatever, if you are interested to learn more about this topic.

[@Alex-zs7gw]

Were you there babe?

[@kdshak4904]

@@dnocturn84 Well said. This videos is to be considered as part of many other videos and written material. No single book or a video can do justice to a complex topic such Roman Empire. 🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@finngregory3599]

@@wendellthomas179 you should see half the videos out there about Vikings, the inaccuracies drive me nuts, but the videos are still entertaining.

[@alessiorenzoni5586]

The Roman occupation of Germany over the course of nearly 20 years of uninterrupted military campaigns (12 BC to AD 5) its eastern borders were expanded and moved further east, from the River Weser to the River Elbe. wild lands (covered by forests and marshes), with a population difficult to control, since it is distributed not in large urban centers but on the contrary in numerous small towns of no more than 50-100 inhabitants, failed when the entire army sent to garrison the new Germanic province, it was completely destroyed in the battle of the Teutoburg Forest, in 9.

[@RaimoHöft]

There were also initial colonies and trading posts (always Phase I of the roman colonization program) established between Alba and Odra. But after it didn't work out well... well I wouldn't write about my biggest failure snd mistske in MY history books either... what exactly is what ronans did! 🤗

[@Arcaryon]

Germanicus for instance had to take a massive legion into battle to merley *stall* the raids into Roman territory.

[@DylanWolfram14]

This is how I like to start my Saturday morning

[@soberman1520]

it's actually 10pm here

[@zacharysoares1985]

Right with a joint in hand ;)

[@jessd1952]

Jumping Romans that are in your backyard? Swing first, ask questions later lol.

[@garygardener2138]

@@zacharysoares1985 Same👊🏻

[@gutholz4443]

You like to start your saturday with expanding your kingdom?

[@obiabamba8529]

Germans are strong and solid.

[@memazov6601]

This is Roman Empire in a Nutshell

[@DamonNomad82]

To set Augustus' reaction to Arminius' betrayal to verse: "Roses are red, My Empire rules many regions, Quintilius Varus, Give me back my Legions!"

[@alimuhannad9476]

Cringe

[@arthur2953]

@@alimuhannad9476 Stay mad cringelord

[@hollyandcalebgaming8069]

​@@alimuhannad9476hater

[@sizanogreen9900]

I think it would have been nice to have mentioned the Limes in this video, as it is practically the symbol of the romans giving up on conquering germania instead focussing on drawing a line in the sand, much like hadrians wall in northern britain.

[@TheCrazierz]

It did mention forts being built

[@sizanogreen9900]

@@TheCrazierz yeah but most people won't think of a hundreds of kilometer long border wall with just that and frankly I have the suspicion that quite a lot of people have never heard of the german limes only of hadrians wall.

[@c.j.rogers2422]

Hadrian's wall was not so much a defensive barrier or the point at which the RE gave up on expansion, as is erroneously assumed, as it was a method of consolidating travel corridors to facilitate the collection of border and commerce taxes.

[@RustyDust101]

The Limes also was not a solid wall all along the border of the conquered Roman territory in Germania Magna. It was a string of forts / castellae within easy signaling of each other. There were some minor palisades but not a true WALL along this line of forts in areas where natural borders like rivers or such did not provide ample defense.

[@sizanogreen9900]

@@RustyDust101 Well, hadrians wall also was not that impressive as a wall. And besides this is not a wall measuring contest, if it were we should be talking about that chinese one. Also I recall the palisades being acompanied by earthen works concentrating trade through a manageable number of gateways for taxation purposes. Either way, impressive structure which should be more widely known.

[@cypsrp7924]

The Netflix show Barbarians season 1 highlighted this exactly! It was really well done. Plus, I speak German so it was fun to watch in their native German!

[@rainerm.8168]

Definitely not THEIR native German. That was an ancient form of some Germania tribes' languages that much much later developed into German.

[@bangscutter]

The empires and kingdoms changed over the course of history, but it's amazing that the conflict / rivalry between the Latin and Germanic people groups along the Rhine border spanned two millennia and has largely not changed, even until the modern times today between France and Germany.

[@Tolstoy111]

The French aren’t really Latin people are they? They are Gaulo-Celtic.

[@shanehughes3511]

The french are celtic, germanic and gaul. The french have more in common with the british and irish than with the spanish or italians. The southern provinces maybe not so much but certainly most of the north and central regions. Everything north of Leon for sure.

[@wyihupoip8105]

France is not a latin country. The Gauls and Celts are a Germanic group. So on that basis, France is more Germanic than Latin, though Gaul was part of the Roman empire for centuries.

[@wyihupoip8105]

@@shanehughes3511 Absolutely!

[@stefanobusti3553]

@@wyihupoip8105 And of course the same goes for the Franks afterwards.

[@NotVeryRandomDude]

6:32 Well, he wasn’t wrong.

[@HistoriaenCeluloide]

Because they considered it was an unproductive region and expensive to maintain 📜

[@hillbilly904]

Exacly! If people think Rome could not conquer Germania they are simply clueless :D

[@lamborghiniurus2660]

Alexander the great says " hi lol"

[@uhbaoifuhoiafj456]

@@hillbilly904 ? They tried it over and over again. The problem was that the terrain is the worst for a organized army. In the south are big mountains and everywhere else were huge forests and swamps. This is just a pure Nightmare. They were so anxious about Germania that they build the limes(huge Wall) to defend themselfes.

[@schris3]

That's another factor

[@uhbaoifuhoiafj456]

@@hillbilly904 Augustus tried to conquer it,Germanicus, Germanicus son Caligula, Marc Aurel did everything he could, Commudus tried it and in the end Rome gets destroyed by a german tribe with Odoacer (Flavius) as leader. They are just not the superpower every Rome nerd think they were.

[@adriennegormley9358]

Interesting finding this video now, as I am currently rereading Lindsey Davis' IRON HAND OF MARS. Davis includes a lot of information on what happened to Varus in her background on this book. Her book takes place in 71 CE after Vespasian took power. Both Davis and Steven Saylor have done a lot of great background work for their mysteries set in Rome.

[@Paramecium914]

Me: I wonder when this will go downhill for the Romans. “And then they are friends with Arminius.” Me: Yeh that’ll do it.

[@cageybee7221]

it went downhill when Varus betrayed rome's allies by demanding exorbitant tributes. this is why arminius flipped to the german side, his people were being starved.

[@headhunter1945]

Varus was previously stationed in the middle east, and became somewhat known for corruption and greed, as well as brutally putting down any hint of rebellion. The tribes were of warrior traditions and had a great deal of freedom before the Romans came along. Additionally, Germanic law relied on fines, while Romans were relatively quick to execute. Combine this knowledge and it's pretty easy to see how Varus might have brought this on himself.

[@germaniatv1870]

@@cageybee7221 It was more then "Tributes". It was about "Home","Believe","Freedom". Arminius meant that Rome will change the culture of the Germans.Rome crucified the Germans,Slaved them ect. I know,people adore the Ancient-Rome. But peoples who have been overrun by Rome wasnt that happy. But indeed. Rome demanded more and more tribute. So, looking at all this,the Germans wasnt people who lived in the mud. They actually had Weapons,Knifes,Swords,Bows,Speers before coming in contact with Rome. Jewels,Cloth,Dishes,Tools ect. Arminius and the Germans who followed did all to preserve German culture and language. We still speak our tongue because of him. Isnt that amazing?

[@germaniatv1870]

@@headhunter1945 Word.

[@cageybee7221]

@@germaniatv1870 i've always found the "mud huts" narrative laughable, because the romans lost to them all the time, so if it were true what would that have made the romans?

[@AudieHolland]

Arminius, riding together with Varus at the head of the Roman column: 'Hold on bro, I'll be back with more troops.'

[@don_juant]

technically not a lie

[@AudieHolland]

@@don_juant It was a promise

[@Infiltator2]

its not quite accurate. Amrinius was in charge of around 100 troops that were hired by the roman that know the land and were looking out for enemies. which in itself was quite a good idea. they were ahead of the roman troops, if they die, nor roman died. They know the land and it tricks, so they really help them out. Just bad luck that the head of thoose guys couldn't see the rest of his people just dying because of the romans. Funny thing is also hat as his father was entering and accused him of betrayel he actually said its true. But everyone thought it a joke because he lived in rome for 20 years, learned the language, learned everything about the military and was good leader.

[@AudieHolland]

@@Infiltator2 It was a joke. You know a joke does not need to be 'quite accurate' or whatever you're claiming?

[@Infiltator2]

@@AudieHolland i know, that wasn‘t related to your good joke. It was just additional information for you that i wanted to provide

[@Atlaspower78]

Rome attacks Germania... grandpa Schwarzenegger: "hold my mead"

[@РимскийОрел]

Generally, the Roman emperor Domitian conquered southwestern Germany, namely the ("Decumatian Fields") in 85 AD. And part of the Germans, namely the majority of the Hutt tribe, became Roman subjects!

[@loneranger4734]

You became a Roman subject!

[@РимскийОрел]

@@loneranger4734 Better to be Roman than barbarian!

[@Rondo2ooo]

@@РимскийОрел how anything above or on the east of the Roman empire weren't barbaric? So yes, your ancestors too. Chill about it, the Romans were far ahead compared with any other culture in Europe (excluding ancient Greece maybe from which the borrowed quite some).

[@РимскийОрел]

@@Rondo2ooo In Eastern Europe, the Romans are admired, because thanks to them we can use the Western benefits of civilization. And without the Romans, the modern world would never have been!

[@benjaminvanderneut6826]

@@РимскийОрел As I know Moskou and Kiev are founded by the vikings just like they came to the swamps of the Netherlands and many other places. Ukraine flag has even a tribe symbol from Rurik on it. So allready european roots and i agree without the romans things would be very different nowadays :)

[@MrErdem95]

Too much overextension.

[@laurnborne3830]

Should've made them vassals and placate them with that prestige

[@divifilius2357]

@@laurnborne3830 They don't like to be ruled in any form not even symbolically. That's why they were so many tribes to begin with. They had tribes within tribes and so on. Plus Julius Caesar kind of made that impossible. He instilled a healthy amount of hatred in many of the germanic tribes when he crossed the Rhine just to burn down tribal settlements.

[@Stormbringer2012]

Never understood why the loss of 3 legions were such a big deal for Rome. After all, they suffered much bigger defeats in the past and shrugged them off.

[@DACalvinify]

Maybe it’s because they gained nothing out of it? Plus losing to Germanic tribes is relatively worse than losing to say Carthage.

[@divifilius2357]

The Romans thought it would be easy since german unity was nonexistent but once this reality was shattered they were not stupid. They understood that Germania was not even prosperous and full of "savages" so the cost-benefit ratio of such an undertaking was unimaginably low. Why even go through the hardship of conquering and occupying Germania with a comfy barrier such as the Rhine anyhow. Besides, if you leave the Germans alone they'll end up killing each other before the day's end! Less work for Rome ;) Edit: They did shrug it off in the end and immediately spent the next 20 years or so making war on Germans in the name of Vengeance during the campaigns of Tiberius and Germanicus. They just didn't see the point of conquering Germania.

[@Stormbringer2012]

@@DACalvinify I don't buy that. The Romans suffered much bigger defeats by German tribes before this battle. I think Augustus used this as an excuse to pull out of that money pit called Germania in favor of consolidation of the territories already conquered. Even history in his time showed him the Germans needed to dealt with by conquest. He should of realized that though Germania cost more resources that it was worth, the price of that cost would be many times less than the cost of garrisons, future battles, property damage, and plunder caused by leaving Germania essentially unconquered and by unconquered I mean not occupied/annexed.

[@scintillam_dei]

@@Stormbringer2012 What bigger defeats?

[@divifilius2357]

@@Stormbringer2012 What? History in Augustus' time showed him the Empire was far too large to defend without natural borders. Besides they didn't conquer Germania for the same reasons they didn't conquer the desert. Wasn't worth it.

[@rowanvithanage4195]

Not surprising that the Germans were putting a hell of a fight till the end, after all these were the very people who invaded half of Europe, fought 2 superpowers in various places & didn't surrender until Berlin fell.

[@tomhoni9642]

Overextension, aggressive expansion and not enough spare admin points to core it

[@SdoubleA]

Ah yes. A fellow HOI4 player.

[@BuzzSargent]

Imagine walking from Rome to Northern Europe. It is easy to forget that to move an army that means walking in these years. Good Show.

[@AndrewsPublications]

Who are you? Are you so old and you watch such nonsense?

[@ugandanwarrior5657]

Not a big deal. Moving an army meant walking all the time untill 20th century.

[@zacariasdelselva1119]

Western Europe*

[@vaultteam6]

Rome: Germania meh. Also Rome: Conquering modern day England and Wales, is suitable.

[@MalleusIudaeorum]

@Safwaan Absolutely false, where did you get that nonsensical information? Briton before it even became apart of the empire was one of the most important trade hubs and had some of the best metalworking in the known world and lots of important metals (such as tin and iron) and other materials. They were also known for breeding extremely good warhorses and the best war dogs which were sought after across the world and were another important part of trade for the isles.

[@bryanperalta740]

The British Island were rich in ore and bronze hence their was more incentive in subjugating it as compared to Germania

[@unifiedhorizons2663]

@Safwaan well ENGLEND farmable land is only beaten by Germany 56 englend 54% france 49% poland 51% GERMANY ANNEXING POLAND IS Basically ANNEXING ANOTHER GERMANY Romans used England heavily in terms of food/tin

[@unifiedhorizons2663]

@Safwaan German main weakest is Russia underdeveloped status, in many place Russia on global map has few sectors of lights being so dim in some spaces it’s non existent Germany would of beaten the Russians if Russia didn’t blow up all roads and rail roads Germans could get tigers to front to stop Russian armor break throughs allies where to far behind to do anything leaving all the heavy lifting on Germany look it up in fair battles Germany always won. like even Italians beat them without anti tank guns. Germans reach mascow there was barely any rails or roads left so Germans also running of oil

[@unifiedhorizons2663]

@Safwaan meanwhile, its birth rates is worse out of the eastern nation slowly becoming new china

[@Relbl]

Mountains and rivers, the great borders of antiquity. When you have a natural boundary like the Danube or the Rhine river you can't really expect to take a piece-meal approach to conquest on the other side. The next river to hold would have been the Elbe which is basically the old East-West German border, representing an area maybe half the size of Gaul from the Rhine - still MASSIVE for those times, especially from an already frontier region.

[@jesperlykkeberg7438]

Actually the next river for the Romans to hold was the Weser river which they had advanced to (at Hameln, Rinteln and Minden Römerlager) and had managed to hold on to, but never the less found too difficult to hold with only three legions especially during the winter, which is one reason why they retreated along Tecklenburger Wald towards their winter quarters at Cologne and Xanten at the Rhine when they were ambushed in the Silvia Teutoburgensis.

[@emilpetron7214]

Some historians state, that the fondness of Romans for rivers as borders caused them many problems. In the ancient world without many good roads and especially in the dense forests or Germania rivers aren't borders. They're the best way to travel and transport good and have contact. So many tribes or groups were unwittingly split by the Romans causing conflict.

[@Warmaker01]

Also I want to add is that the great era of Roman warfare, expansion, and conquest was with the Republic due to stability. The Punic Wars saw the Romans defeated many times with huge loss of life by some dude named Hannibal. The Roman Republic persisted through the Punic Wars. Second Punic War was 17 years of heavy fighting and great losses, but Rome kept at it and won. It kicked off a period of expansion that would be the foundation of the eventual Empire. A major reason for this was internal stability of the Republic before the late era of Sulla, Marius, Caesar, etc. The Senate was fully functioning and command of large armies could be entrusted to men for foreign wars. By the time we get to the Imperial era, the Roman Emperors were not trusting enough of giving someone command of large field armies for fear of being usurped. Late Roman Republic and Imperial Roman Legions were fickle in their loyalties, not like the Republic Legions that conquered Carthage and the Mediterranean world. The only times in the Imperial era where we see great expansion was when the Empire was stable and the Emperor powerful enough in his control that armies can be sent abroad. Either that, or an Emperor so good with unquestioned authority and leadership, i.e. Trajan, to personally lead the army in conquests, and not worry about someone starting a rebellion back in Rome. These periods were few and far in between for the Empire and more energy was spent just to keep everything together and for maintaining the frontier defenses. Even then, those frontier defenses were the cause of instability for the Empire. I lost track how many times Legions in the frontier, especially in the Rhine defenses, where the soldiers felt like raising one of their own in rebellion to become the next Emperor.

[@tychus8219]

Thats pretty interesting view on the topic. I gotta say i havent really tought about it, i always tought empires were more reliable and overall strong, but after seeing your point of view, i gotta say i am convinced that you are absolutely right. Indeed great empire is harder to persist, because backstabbing, plots and overthrows. Thank you!

[@ollih.901]

@@tychus8219 A major misconception in relation to ancient history is the idea of a modern state in general. People tend to think anachronisticly and use modern concepts where they dont belong. For example you see the huge territory, but most people living there are not roman citizens (until some emperor gave general citizenship). The provinces were heavyly exploited over centuries to sustain wealth for a few romans. The proconsul was rarely ever interested in developing the province he was reigning over, but instead tried to get out of it as much as possible, which regularly evoked huge conflicts with the natives.

[@dirkdriessen1133]

Best comment. The empire system was ineffective and weak and used most of its energy in internal affairs. Also it favored nepotism over competance. "Germany was not worth the efford" is bullshit, since it always was a thread to roman boarders.

[@fishingislife9554]

“Some dude” lol, you are “some dude”, Hannibal was a legend

[@demareorobinson5008]

@@fishingislife9554 Facts.

[@lancevance5907]

Germans: *Spend centuries trying to beat the Roman Empire* Also Germans: *Spend centuries arguing that they're the rightful children of the Roman Empire*

[@Philipp.of.Swabia]

@dr. Will J. Rosenblatt 🤣🤣👌🏻

[@frankishempire2322]

"Spend centuries arguing" There is no arguing...

[@Philipp.of.Swabia]

@@frankishempire2322 True. Cause we weren’t.

[@germandestroyzeppelin4432]

Top 10 anime betrayals

[@stapleman007]

Shield hero wants to have a word with you.

[@seb0rn739]

In 8th grade, we had a field trip in Kalkriese where the battle of Teutoburger Wald between Varus and the Germanic tribes probably happened and where one of those Roman armoured masks was found. It's actually not far from where I live. Back then, I didn't think of it much but looking back it was an amazing experience. It's basically an open-air museum where they traced back and reconstructed battle fortifications. There were also some digging sites where archaeologists were still looking for weapons, armour, coins, and stuff.

[@stefanh.960]

When you sit in a dark forest and suddenly the trees start chanting in German you don't want to remain there.

[@Terlin1466]

@Der Traubengott yet they went back and destroyed everyone. Think about Norse history of the gods. ITs so similar to each other. But there is a disconnected. And this disconnect happens during the later Dark ages when Rome falls. The climate changes. IT gets colder. And when things clear up again The gods while still similar are now Different. Its curious why the climate changes. Its unsure why atm far as i know.

[@northeastokwari1889]

@@Terlin1466 What are you talking about? What climate change are you referring to

[@rimbas.3662]

Peter Heather wrote a book called 'The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarian'. In chapter 2 of the book, it highlights that the main reason for Rome's refusal to conquer Germania Magna was due to economic and logistical reason. Germania at that time was relatively undeveloped with no major towns, settlements or roads unlike in Gaul. Moreover, the Rhine frontier was already practical for logistical purposes because Romans transport their supplies from the Mediterranean through the Moselle river and to the Rhine river. It's less to do with the defeat at Teutoburg forest which stopped the Romans, because the Romans suffered worse defeats in the past by Hannibal, yet continued fighting against him. Furthermore, the Romans continued the conquest of Dacia, despite Rome's defeat by the Dacians in the First Dacian War. To conclude, Rome did not pursue the conquest of Germania because of its just not worth it economically.

[@konsumkind99]

you know... the beginning of this video talks about roman ambitions in germania to adress this argument. Also there are plenty of examples of other places the romans tried to conquer/conquered, which werent that developed e.g. scotland, northern balkan, arabian desert. its also a weak argument, because there is no real way of telling germanic and celtic tribes apart and you have great degrees of intermixing, especially in southern germany where you can find a lot of important oppida (Manching, Menosgada, ...). The argument of "not worth it" is already one, that caesar uses in his de bello gallico and we all know how questionable his statements are ;D

[@arminiusdescendant8022]

Germania Magna was full of wood which was a most important ressource of the Roman civilisation instead of the Mediterranean which had been already deforested at that time due to the Roman hunger for wood. That would had been the economic worth of conquering Germania Magna.

[@krisinsaigon]

Yes indeed, the Rhine and the Danube make excellent natural borders The soil in Germania is more naturally fertile than in the roman world but at that time the thick forest cover meant it could not be exploited

[@krisinsaigon]

@@konsumkind99 they could tell Celts and Germans apart. The start of that book is him explaining about the Germams being different from the Gauls in language and custom

[@konsumkind99]

@@krisinsaigon yeah, no. The root of name "germanic" is actually the name for an celtic tribe. But im talking about modern sience anyways. "According to Herbert Schutz, although the peoples to the east of the Rhine included Celts and mixed populations, as a political contrivance Caesar defined a population boundary along the Rhine ignoring cultural lines, invented a people and denominated all of them to the east as Germani, grouping them with the unrelated Cimbri and Teutones and giving their lands the name Germania, as opposed to Gallia". In fact its really hard to identify a typical germanic tribe, since they had no uniformal language, religion or tradition. So using the term 'germanic' is controversial, since it doesnt define a people group

[@djzanis5220]

I haven’t watched the video yet but the romans (and the byzantines for years to come) seemed way more interested in the east than the west. There was nothing of interest in those lands back then. I’m surprised they even went as far as England.

[@TheCrazierz]

Bro, England had very interesting rocks I hear

[@djzanis5220]

@@TheCrazierz lmao, in the east rocks had a gold coating

[@Megarenegade666]

Caesar's England campaign was more of a punishment campaign for helping Gaul. Avl Plautius' campaign was a campaign for gaining popularity for Claudius.

[@JesterEric]

They mined lead, silver, copper and tin in England. Some say lead poisoning brought down the empire as they used lead alot.

[@Call_me_daddy6]

London was a roman city back then. Londinium

[@sosig6445]

Marcus Aurelius was also close to conquering Germanyia during the Marcomannic war, aldough instead of the Rhine he attacked across the Danube. His sucessor however abandoned the campaign.

[@Merennulli]

Whoever is running the simulation, let us know how the "what if Varus didn't trust Arminius" version played out.

[@xaiano794]

This is like those games where you have like 4 successful campaigns, do everything right and your top general just kills himself falling off his horse on the ride home.

[@yudistiraliem135]

I think the psychological effect was overstated. Germania was very much backward and poor compared to Gaul and there’s the question where the new border should be. Marcus Aurellius had plan for Rome new borders across Germania but he died before the plan went into action.

[@EmperorCaligula_EC]

The cherries you can't get are always sour. =P

[@headhunter1945]

Germania was likely not nearly as poor as you think. It was in Roman interest to feign sudden disinterest in Germania after their humiliating defeat.

[@yudistiraliem135]

@@headhunter1945 it wouldn't cover the cost of legionaires and Rome was running on deficit. Rome tried again against Parthia because it was actually rich area. Do you think a civ that can stand Hannibal trashing their backyard suddenly has no willingness to fight in Germany because of a loss?

[@zacariasdelselva1119]

cope

[@stevenashairline3701]

@@headhunter1945 there are more humiliating Roman defeats than this overstated loss.

[@flyshacker]

I didn’t know any of this! Perhaps this was the turning point in the entire Roman Empire? Thanks for the video!

[@princeofdarkness8037]

I live in Bielefeld which is a German city situated along the Hermansweg which itself runs throughout the Teutoburg Forest. Bielefeld was originally North of the Forest but now has areas on both sides. Just down the road near Detmold we have 'Hermannsdenkmal` which is a 53.4 meter statue in honor of Arminius. I've visited this many times and also the Teutoburg Forest. I also competed in the Hermannslauf back in 1987 (a cross country run through forest/built up and road areas) from Hermannnsdenkmal to the Castle (Sparrenburg) in Bielefled. A total of 31.1 KM of pretty grueling terrain. I completed it in 2 hours and 39 minutes, which isn't too shabby considering I was on the lash until 3am the night before :P

[@manibigbadam4069]

You are lying as an German I know that something like Bielefeld doesn’t exist.

[@KillingStar401]

@@manibigbadam4069 So true

[@ibimsnur4651]

@@manibigbadam4069 Very true.

[@taurondur]

@@manibigbadam4069 Arminia exist?

[@manibigbadam4069]

@@mypfpisliterallyyou6126 don’t know if Prince of darkness told bullshit or not but in Germany there is an running gag that Bielefeld doesn’t exist.

[@diecastworld7962]

And that's amazing how Germania never fell also contributing in spreading modern Western culture and other things also fun fact English is a Germanic language

[@Ophaganestopolis]

Most of western culture comes from the romans. Western culture is most strongly influenced by the Greek philosophy, Roman law, and Christian culture.

[@headhunter1945]

@@Ophaganestopolis From the Romans...... as interpreted by Germanic people ;) And it's not like they didn't have their own traditions. Romans were quick to execute. Germanic people relied on fines. How much execution do you see in Europe now?

[@Ophaganestopolis]

@JOHN CENA I interpreted the comment of Diecast as "Germania saved western culture FROM the romans", which didn't make sense to me.

[@NawDawgTheRazor]

@ian 1 they are a mix of Germanic, French, Celtic, and Scandinavian ancestry. Think of all the wars fought between these countries, most deadly of which the World Wars. They were fighting themselves, how sad. But I guess that’s all wars.

[@NawDawgTheRazor]

Yeah it’s amazing how because they didn’t fall, they were able to sack and overthrow Rome later on, destroying centuries of knowledge and progress and plunging Western civilization into the Dark Ages for hundreds of years. Also English is an amalgamation of French, Latin, Old English/Celtic languages, and Germanic/Saxon.

[@YTuseraL2694]

Actually, I think that giving up on conquering Germania (specifically west of Elbe) was, in hindsight at least, a colossal mistake and a great miscalculation on the part of the Romans. Germania wouldn't have contributed much in terms of lucrative goods, taxes and trade like eastern provinces did, but what it would've contributed was much more important in strategic terms and would definitely outweight the risks and costs - exceedingly shorter border to defend, bigger population poll for economy (taxing) and army (recruitment) to use, and a potential for defence in depth better than Gaul could ever offer it. And also, a good deal of the tribes that in later centuries formed confederations and made big incursions into the Roman territory would now be subjugated and part of Rome. As a consequence, not only much more legions could've been raised, but more of them could've been sent to guard the eastern provinces from Parthian and especially Sassanid Persia. But of course, even the most perfect, most inpenetrable border in the world is useless if even in a timeline like that there is not a social stability, people aren't treated well and the emperors are still assassinated on a daily basis and usurpers are a normal occurence.

[@divifilius2357]

I’m surprised to see in the comments that so many people believe that conquering Germania would have prevented the collapse almost 500 years later. You guys are failing to realize that using the Rhine as the massive obstacle that it was, like the alps and Danube, is probably the best reason why it lasted for another 500 years. Cause what makes Rome truly unique is how long it lasted. Conquering Germania likely would’ve caused the collapse sooner. History of empires has proven blind expansion is a monster that is never full. They thrived on cities so that tax and trade you say will help with resources will never be enough to sustain the kind of resources needed to seriously consider the endeavor ever again

[@YTuseraL2694]

@@divifilius2357 wait dude, are you for real? Where did I claim (or give that impression) that conquering Germania had something to do with the fall of the west in the fifth century? Anyway, you are writing as if adding Germania to the empire would inevitably mean they'd never stop expanding, which is not really true. Elba offered almost the same protection as did the Rhine, but since it was positioned further east, most of the northern Danube would've been eclipsed into the territory and not directly exposed to the unconquered lands, which would equal much shorter border to defend and more population to be mobilised if needed. So THAT should've been the FINAL border. And I already said that all the borders of the world account to nothing if there is internal instability and mismanagement of the budget (overpaying the army and that sort of thing).

[@asdfasdfasdf1218]

It wouldn't fix the central problem of "everyone wants to be emperor."

[@YTuseraL2694]

@@asdfasdfasdf1218 no, it probably wouldn't (although who knows). I never said it would though.

[@lief3414]

I wouldn't call it a colossal mistake as they did quite well even without it. Moreover, conquering any territory bordering your own is usually pretty good, the problem is risking huge amount of resources (and potential political turmoil) in an empire with thousands of problems for what essentialy is an investment in the future. I would argue that if one could pick a conquest that would be most valuable for romans it would be Parthia. Although it would require massive campaign it is certainly possible. The difference is that once the initial investment was done, a lot would be repaid with loot and the land would immidiately start producing income. Nomadic tribes are also much less of a threat than a germanic uprising, making it relatively less expensive to govern. You can quite reliably compare Germania and Parthia to Britain and Egypt respectively, one being a nuisance far away and the other the golden goose. Conquering Parthia woul likely accelerate the schism of the empire, however for the time being it would make a noticable difference. It doesn't really matter since with the arrival of empire romans started looking out for competition and threat on the inside, rather than outside. Political instability, extreme riches and unrivaled might meant focusing on keeping the empire together was far more important than any further expansion. Romans could've probably conquered the world if they worked together, but in the end it would only bring the fall quicker while not changing much (for the romans that is).

[@joelwilliamson3322]

If it hadn’t gone this way, German could have become a Romance language like French. Crazy to think about.

[@mr.coffee6242]

In Cologne, Germany. There is remnants of the Roman wall from that era. The city of Colonia (Cologne) was the furthest point of Roman expansion in Germania.

[@Just_A_Newbie]

Short answer: goddamn trees

[@stapleman007]

and the goddamn swamps. You can cut a path though trees, building roads through swamps wasn't practical at this time. Wasn't enough population density, nor enough cities to bother connecting.

[@Fl1mper]

Imagine if Rome hadn't fallen and Europe wouldn't have fought itself for the following 1500 years. What our modern world would've looked like...

[@hullmees666]

rome fought itself as well though. basically constant civil wars during the last 200 years.

[@theroaringdragon306]

@@hullmees666 It was not like a constant civil war like the sengoku period though. There was only a civil war for the empire every time the Ceaser dies or if some upstart create a rebellion. Now compare that to the apocalyptic near constant war between different tribes, kings, nobles, emperors, popes. And to add jet fuel to the fire we have constant nomadic tribes that would attack and settle into eroupe if you need a example look at Hungry or Mongole or the Arabic tribes that spread islam. Which adds a stick of dynamite by adding another religion to the battle royal.

[@RuiLuz]

We would all be Space Romans by now, the praetorians would be the equivalent to Space Marines.

[@rkit6707]

Rome was cringe

[@gas132]

it would look like Qing China

[@demoulius1529]

As a Dutchmen, I can confirm that there isent alot here that would interest conquoring people xD We have land NOW but like half of our country has been 'conquored' from the sea. We have to fortify the ground where we want to build things and even then our buildings tend to sink into the ground (even if just a little and very slowly) at a rate of maybe a half to a few centimeters per year. Sidewalks very regulary have to be raised up again because they have lowered below street level. We are essentially living in a swamp turned semi-solid land and back then, it was just swampy forest.

[@mihailoljubomirovic7736]

Rome:*destroys half europe* Germania:UNO REVERSE CARD!! Edit:wtf i just got 7 likes,got HEARTED AND GOT 2 COMMENTS ON MY OWN ONE!! Edit 2:Fun fact:Knowledgia makes the best videos in the world!Love this channel!

[@Saviarai-Dravolika]

It's quad super-effective! A critical hit! Rome: oh come on!

[@thebrocialist8300]

Civilized* half of Europe

[@mihailoljubomirovic7736]

12 likes?That's colonization,baby.

[@mihailoljubomirovic7736]

@@Saviarai-Dravolika i subscribed to your channel!

[@mihailoljubomirovic7736]

@@thebrocialist8300 i subscribed to your channel too!

[@Remus-z6y]

I recommend the Eagles at War series by Ben Kane. The 3 books tell the story of the all the events, from the ambush to Germanicus’s campaign. I liked it because the author shows multiple points of views, from historical figures like Arminius and Varus, to made characters that show you the point of view of regular Legionnaires.

[@scintillam_dei]

Amo GERMANICVS. ¡GLORIA PARA EL SUR DE EVROPA!

[@dagmarvandoren9364]

Fur englisch sprecher. Dann ist es immer etwas "anders"

[@unifieddynasty]

They withdrew from Germania but even this was not enough. The Germans followed them back into Rome and this would eventually be a key factor for Rome's downfall.

[@hyltoniali257]

1 more vid on why Dacia is deserted since Aurelius pls

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

This video is simplistic and sensationalized. The best part is about Drusus after that ... not so much. First off - while Augustus was certainly upset about it - the Romans had lost vastly more men in previous battles against migrating tribes and Hannibal than they did in the Teutoburger Wald. The Cimbrian War en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimbrian_War The Second Punic War en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War I would not attribute to "risks" the lack of desire for the Romans to fully subdue the area between the Rhine and Elbe. It would be more the "costs" of doing so and Rome having become over extended under Caesar and Augustus already. Under Caesar, Rome had vastly expanded in Anatolia, Africa and the Middle East - especially in taking Egypt. As long as further conquests were easy - they had gone on - but once they started being a problem - Augustus seems to have felt it was time to consolidate what they'd taken. The Rhine was a natural barrier to hold and a better one than the Elbe. If you look at the costs vs. rewards of the new areas taken under Caesar - the Eastern areas were worth vastly more than Germany - and - were potentially threatened by a much more serious enemy in the Parthians. It also is not as if the Romans stopped expanding all together. Their expansion in the area of the Danube was also extensive. They also went on and took Britain but here - what did they get for it? Britain, like Germany didn't have that much wealth - when compared to the Eastern Roman Empire - but both still had to be garrisoned against invading Picts, Irish and other Barbarians. The Romans certainly could have conquered Germany West of the Elbe but didn't feel it was worth the expense to both conquer it and to hold it against barbarians farther to the East. .

[@andrewg.carvill4596]

I often think the Ancient Romans simply found they hated long winters with rotten weather (and in those days winters with rotten food as well). They made 3 strong military forays into Scotland and then decided to build a wall along the border instead. It's very telling that they called Ireland Hibernia. Hibernia translates roughly as "Winter country". They didn't invade Hibernia but likely had at least one fortified trading post there. When you consider Asian winters and African heat, it's easy to believe that the Romans concluded that the further you went from the Mediterranean (which they called Mare Nostrum - "Our Sea") the worse became the climate and everything connected with climate. In the pre-technological age their whole economy was still to a great extent founded on agriculture. They probably discovered that from their standpoint, in the last analysis Northern Europe just wasn't worth it. A final telling point: they did conquer as far up the Rhine as you can produce wine!

[@hashtag_thisguy]

Watched a 3 hour documentary once, apparently it's mainly because Maximus Decimus Meridius, general of the pheonix legions, commander of the armies in the North was betrayed and thus became a gladiator to avenge the murder of his wife and child and to set Rome free.

[@andrei1971]

I am of Germanic Viking + English / Norman descent. I know my genetic instincts, and I know history. We don't back down.

[@commenter4190]

English / Norman? the Normans were few thousands knights and even in the William Army there were Bretons and Flemish and other French soldiers. In the birth of the "Anglo-Saxon" people there is a majority of celtic Britons who were assimilated into the Germanic group and not confined in the mountains of Wales or in Cornwall or expelled to Bretagne. Despite there is nothing of celtic language in English, which is an half Latin, Germanic Language (Normans did speak a Langue d'Oil French).

[@andrei1971]

@@commenter4190 I have an ancestor who was a General during the Norman conquests of 1066. That side of the family is descended from there.

[@commenter4190]

@@andrei1971 Fantastic! You are a noble! Best wishes.

[@romteb]

Napoleonic France conquered germany in 2 weeks, 1/8th Viking william and it's 90%+ genetically celt army conquered anglosaxon britain and ruled for 300 years with french institutions still holding to this day, you like everybody else are a product of circumstances and history to think that you are somewhat genetically predisposed to refuse defeat is laughable.

[@commenter4190]

@@romteb I am not british anyway. I don't think the French are so "90% genetically celt", if they are celts, the French are very much brown-haired and brown-eyed, not so tall celts... Celtic people from Ireland or Scotland are pretty different from the average French in my opinion, I don't deny many in some areas of France can have germanic descent. For the rest, I agree, that over 50% of the English language is in the end, Latin derived from Norman French. Goodbye!

[@Samson16667]

This might be a stupid question, but when Rome sent troops to Northern France, Germania and England, did they go through the Alps most of the time or sail around Spain "hugging" the coast line??

[@enricomanno8434]

England did not exist at that time

[@MarkVrem]

You can just sail from Northern Italy to the city of Marseille in France on the Southern coast. But obviously, there have to be good land routes through the Alps as well, or otherwise, the capital of the Empire wouldn't have been eventually moved to Milan. Just cause Hannibal struggled through the Alps, might be more of an indicator he wanted to surprise the Romans and not take the most obvious guarded route.

[@c.i.a8359]

@@enricomanno8434 exactly it was britania not England. England didn't exist till the anglo saxons arrived.

[@yrok244]

This channel is absolutely incredible. I love the videos you guys create, super informative and very well presented. Seriously underrated channel. Keep up the great work!

[@AndrewsPublications]

Who are you?! This is what it is like when children play History and are simply ignorant - even graphically incapable of coming up with something real. Never let your students subscribe to this shit!

[@harvestingseason2725]

@@AndrewsPublications r u a professor?

[@aka99]

@@harvestingseason2725 just a troll. ignore him.

[@kutayfunk]

Because they saw that the weather was bad, cold, raining. There was always a thick grey cloud layer floating above that land. They understood that it is not a pleasant land to live.

[@pieterjan29]

Why is Britain not a part of the Roman empire on the map?

[@Sungawakan]

Because they conquered Britain after the events shown here.

[@scintillam_dei]

@@Sungawakan Except the northern cold wilderness with hostile barbarians.

[@eternal_riftz8801]

Because during Augustus era they didn't conquer Britannia

[@Dommy521]

@@scintillam_dei LMAO

[@wyihupoip8105]

@@scintillam_dei yes, northern barbarians were very hard to Romanize

[@MrErdem95]

Rome kept rolling dice 0 and Germans kept rolling 9.

[@MikhaelAhava]

Watching this as I lift weights, good morning before college starts. I’ll share this to someone who likes Rome, I wonder what’ll be his reaction.

[@MA-go7ee]

He'll probably point out how wrong this video was because Rome did conquer large parts of Germania before and after this

[@LucidWanderer]

@@MA-go7ee Conquering parts doesn't matter if you cant hold it, Germania conquered ALL of Western Roman Empire. Gaul, Hispania, Italy, Britain, there was no place in the Empire the Western Roman could hide from Germanic vengeance.

[@syncranox3967]

@@LucidWanderer Bro stop lying. germania conquered Gaul??? dont make me laugh

[@LucidWanderer]

@@syncranox3967 Why do you think its called France today and not Gaul? Because a Germanic Tribe known as the Franks invaded Roman Gaul and conquered it, that is the entomology of the name France-Franks.

[@syncranox3967]

@@LucidWanderer Yes the Franks were Germanic, but they were not "Germania". Calling all the acts of Germanic peoples the acts of Germania is ridiculous.

[@dazediss6629]

We already know this, it’s because general maximus desimus meridius was captured, imprisoned & forced to fight as a gladiator in Rome.

[@felixchen2190]

Hermann has become one of the popular German given names ever since !

[@felixchen2190]

@annonymous2223 As far as I know, Arminius is a corrupted Latin form of Hermann. If Hermann was not the then Arminius, then there must have been another Latin name for the man who had buried the Roman legions in Teutoburgian Wald ! I believe in the days of the 16th century Western Europe, Martin Luther must have been proficient in Latin and therefore must have known Arminius means Hermann in German.

[@felixchen2190]

@annonymous2223 Please be advised that back in Roman dominated Europe, Latin was the only written language for all until later when Greek gradually became official in the Eastern Roman (especially Byzantine) Empire. So Arminius was the name given to this Germanic warrior by the Roman historians. And during the Reformation Age in 16th century, Martin Luther had to translate it from Aminius into German "Hermann". Based on Wikipedia, it goes like "The German translation of Arminius as Hermann dates from the 16th century, possibly first by Martin Luther.[13] In German, Arminius was traditionally known as Hermann der Cherusker..." Just for fun, German city of Koln is Colonia in Latin, England's London is Londinium in Latin, Austria's Wien (Vienna in English) is Vindobona in Latin, A province in southern Spain called Andalusia literally being Vandal's land, German name Ludwig (English equivalent Louis) is Clovis in Latin, German Wilhelm (William in English) equates with Guliemus in Latin, and German Karl (as Charles in English) originates in Latin Carolus. Again, based on Herman in Wikipedia, Herman is Armand in French, Armando in Spanish., a Dutch or German variant for Herman is Armin, a short form of Latin Arminius...etc. I have found it amusing to discern some relations in these names.

[@felixchen2190]

@annonymous2223 Nobody really has anything concrete to validate this one way or the other. One thing for sure is that Arminius is a Latin name but whether or not it represents a Latinized Hermann may be a matter for a linguist to settle ! As such, I still tend to believe it is a Latinized Hermann simply for the reason that Armin (short for Arminius), another modern German or Dutch name for Hermann, has the same two syllables as Hermann does. Not to mention it is generally accepted by conventional wisdom, more or less like Germania is a Latin name for German Deutschland. Thanks for the feedback though !

[@markthecenturion]

"Germania" was not just modern Germany, but rather all of the land east of the Rhine and north of the Danube. It was just too big, period. The Romans did manage to conquer small parts of it in modern day southern Germany, Holland, Romania, parts of Slovakia, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. Marcus Aurelius was the last Roman emperor to try and extend the empire deeper into Germania. His death ended any further attempts at northward expansion.

[@micahistory]

It's amazing how one battle completely changed Roman history

[@johnbrowns6072]

Yea man Armi really hit them with the best sucker punch of all time.

[@commenter4190]

It is what germanic propaganda wants people to believe -Germanicus punished the Germans at Idistavisus, Arminius was killed by his own countrymen as he wanted to become king, Romans fought for centuries against the Germans and won most of battles, even in 235 AD at Harzhorn well inside (400 miles) german territories and forests. Only in last century of empire (5th century) as roman armies were composed and led by barbarians that it was the collapse of western empire.

[@micahistory]

@@commenter4190 but the Romans never reconquered Germania though so I'm correct

[@commenter4190]

@@micahistory Romans never conquered also Persia despite centuries of war but this doesn't mean that Persia was militarly stronger than the Roman Empire... simply the conquest of "Germania" wasn't worth the effort due to very low local resources (Romans weren't looking for timber) and the incredible warlike attitude of the barbarians. As I've already said, most times Romans and Germanic tribes met on the battlefield it was a Roman victory until the very Roman army started to be composed and led by barbarians, as the inhabitants of the Empire had become christianized and this meant they had lost patriotism and military values that the pagan traditional religion of ancient Rome represented.

[@micahistory]

@@commenter4190 yes but although the germans couldn't invade Rome, they were able to successfully defend their lands

[@SediAgameRbaD]

plot twist: Italy is projecting robots and modern troops' guns, artillery, tanks, jets and ships to reform the Roman Empire, calling it "Roman Empire II"

[@_Wai_Wai_]

4:00 Why is it, that people always die from falling off horses, even after achieving great feats?

[@readerviewer8698]

Causes injury to the spinal cord

[@appletree6741]

Proof that god has humour

[@bedstuyrover]

Augustus opposed further expansion of the Empire; i believe it was a case of cost outweighing benefits as the empire spread.

[@hamzahmz6096]

In little points Rome faced less divided tribes in action against the empire on seemingly endless area with harsh climate in Magna Germania at a time it encountered Parthian/Sassanid organized empire which inflicted decisive defeats to Rome who in less than century sent more fruitless campaigns against Persia, Arabia Kushit kingdoms ...all these shaped finally the mental of Rome's leadership and its borders

[@sanjin365]

I love your Channel bro. Great Stuff

[@natetwehues2428]

Why didn't Rome conquer Germany: it was poor and difficult to hold. The cost to holding the land wasn't worth the cost to the empire, compared to other areas that the Romans could focus attention on.

[@ahmadmuhammad6200]

They could have conquer west African

[@natetwehues2428]

@@ahmadmuhammad6200 They would have had to sail down the coast, first, or march their army full of metal-armor wearing infantry through the desert.

[@robray111]

So why did they try it in the first place? People forget that empires don't conquer for economic gains. Securing the empire's border from incursions, expanding the glory of Rome, and hundreds of personal ambitions mixed in, are all valid reasons, and yet they failed. And now people argue they weren't interested in conquering at all. What a classic loser move, the guy who doesn't get the girl would say that

[@natetwehues2428]

@@robray111 Oh, they wanted to conquer it. To secure the border, for personal glory, for loot and wealth and slaves, to fuel political ambitions back in Rome. I'm just saying that the problems Rome faced in conquering Germania weren't unique -- they were many of the same problems faced in Gaul ot Dacia. But Rome ended up subjugating those areas because they were economically useful. Germania wasn't.

[@milt6208]

Germans are one tough group of people.

[@OFP-Flashpoint]

Think you're confusing Germanic with German

[@milt6208]

@@OFP-Flashpoint Both are true

[@TheJaviferrol]

Not enough nearly enough riches to be made after a costly campaign nor roads like Gaul. It was decided that it was better to spur animosity between the tribes than occupy it themselves. Plus, you know...Teutoburg...

[@DeutschlandMapping]

Teutoburg was for the Romans like Vietnam was for the Americans.

[@frontgamet.v1892]

I find German history incredibly fascinating because the Germans and Germany were always there, but at the same time not and always different like a shapeshifter. Stupid oversimplified: Rejects Roman annexation - Germanic Tribes defeat Rome, are often slapped in the face, but Rome generally fails to subdue them Create an empire that wasn't really an empire but somehow lived for 1000 years - very special and unique The Kingdom of Prussia and hundreds of German States gangsta! Before being defeated by one of history's greatest generals. defeats the French, unites into a new empire Get a colonial empire Fights 80% of the world alone and almost won.. Is treated badly Comeback as Villian, fights the whole world and only lost because of own mistakes.. Gets divided again Reunites again and is not allowed to be strong again. Also a few German inventions: - Incandescent lamps (Heinrich Göbel 1854) - The Telephone (Johann Philip Reis 1859) - The dynamo and tram (Werner von Siemens 1866) - The 35 mm camera (Oskar Barnack 1925) - Nuclear fission and atomic bomb (Otto Hahn - emigrated to the Americans during Nazi Germany, of course.. Are they lucky that we exist - 1938) - The ship chart (Jürgen Dethloff and Helmut Gröttrub 1969) - Periodic Table (Julius Luther Meyer 1864) - Jeans (Levi Strauss 1873) - The recorder, player - with which the first films were possible (Emil Berliner 1887) - The Aspirin - Which all great athletes felt used to relieve pain, And which saved countless lives (Felix Hoffmann, Klausi Alder.. 1879) - Spark plug (Robert Bosch 1902) - Thermos flask (Reinhold Burger 1903) - the toothpaste (Ottomar Heinsius von Mayenburg) - The coffee filter (Melitta Bentz) - Cassette recorder (Fritz Pfleumer 1928) - Teabag (Adolf Rambold 1929) - The jet engines - Essential for all jets and rockets + First war rockets V1, V2 of the Nazis (Hans von Ohain 1929) - First rocket (general) - The helicopter (Heinrich Focke 1936) - The first car (Carl Benz - With honorary Schnauzer - 1886) - First Computer (Konrad Zuse 1941) - First 3D film (during the Nazi period) - Fanta (Yes the Fanta.. Also during the Nazi era) - The typewriter (Peter Mitterhofer - 1869) - NASA (actually the US buys thousands of German engineers to build NASA because they can't do it themselves) Well, as you saw, we changed the world with our inventions many times. Where we would be today without the German thinkers art. Germany the land of poets and thinkers - that's how it is known. The problem is that many Germans are not proud of their country and blood, unfortunately also because they were brought up that way. Because if you say anything to that effect, you will be called a Nazi. The problem is that many people don't have the right deep historical knowledge that people need to understand the world and and that only Hitler himself and his party were Nazis. Almost no German was a Nazi during the Nazi era. Also, any historian will tell you that the Allies, created Nazi Germany and WWII because of the unfair Versailles Treaty. Germans were so depressed that it is unimaginable for us. They were seen as evil around the world as they were blamed for everything in World War I. And when you have 3 kids at home, no job, money is worthless and no food and water you will follow anyone who fixes it. Because that's what the Nazis did in the beginning - they fixed everything and gave the Germans hope again. No German at the time could have known that Hitler was so crazy. It's not as easy as we always think. Even in the Wehrmacht, only a few liked the Nazis. They were German soldiers dying for the country. the general German soldier, like my grandfather, had nothing to do with the Nazis and the Holocaust. You must consider this one army fought against the rest of the world. And if we are honest: what kind of "peace" could the general German soldier expect? What could have they expect after all the Nazi crimes and everyone thought that all German were evil Nazis. What "Peace" could they expect. These soldiers fought for their lives and German people against a planet. If even many of Hitler's own generals like Rommel (legend) or Stauffenberg knew that he was not quite right in the head. Then the normal people knew that even more. Many were manipulated and could do nothing about it. The Nazis were a small parasite not the Germans. Calling all German soldiers Nazis is like calling all American soldiers democrats because they were in power. We should be prouder of ourselves, after all, Germany has repeatedly fought against the entire world, one time under a bad regime. We made this modern world possible and maintain a reputation for perfection and quality. The hard-working German with perfection in his blood! Or rather, we once had this reputation. Today there is no longer a country of poets and thinkers. We are still occupied by the USA. And people are manipulated and have no prospects. A dark age. What I also find very interesting is that the Germanic people spread very far and are therefore the ancestors of many other people. Therefore, historians are not entirely sure how German the Germanic peoples were, but since they were the first to speak German and also created English, they were already German. In addition, the Germans were also the ancestors of the Vikings means Germanic mythology is almost identical to Norse mythology. Actually the same. Thanks for listening 🥂

[@brettsmith641]

The Germans had honed their skills on the Celts and Scythians for a thousand years.

[@SithStudy]

💯

[@justins7796]

Varus and Arminius could be a good drama film of friends and betrayal

[@jamesjackson5680]

there already is a series on netflix about this very event, it is called barbarians.

[@justins7796]

@@jamesjackson5680 oh cool! I'll have to check it out

[@thesudricenginee]

To this day I still don't know how did Rome managed to hold so many lands while keeping so many tribes in order.

[@andersistbesser]

It was the „share and rule „ thing. The romwns offered culture, citizenship and other priviliges to the defeated people so they did the work for the romans. Most of the roman soldiers have been not even romans. More or less the defeated countries switched sides.

[@stevesheldon8616]

Rome would conquer a territory and install a Rome-friendly ruler who would guarantee taxes to Rome while at the same time giving the people the illusion of autonomy. But this strategy required civilizations that had a powerful central ruler; Germany didn't have this.

[@thesudricenginee]

@@stevesheldon8616 That honestly doesn't sound too bad. I always thought Rome oppressed tribes and other cultures. But I guess I got that narrative because of what they did to Jesus and Christians at first. My mistake then

[@stevesheldon8616]

@@thesudricenginee I grew up in a Baptist church so I believed that Romans were always the bad guys and that they persecuted the early Christians so much that they had to live in the catacombs. But then I went to Rome and went on a tour of the catacombs and learned that Christians never lived down there lol. Of course, Rome was a brutal, militaristic society, but I believe they had to be; before the republic grew strong it was overrun by surrounding groups multiple times.

[@sonofjack6286]

@@stevesheldon8616 They could've pushed the tribes into single, or a couple, large settlement(s) that the entire tribe could call their new home.

[@safebet5841]

A continuous year insertion would have been nice. Great content.

[@morbidiusgrandestofthegran91]

So essentially, the Empire that justified their conquests by calling their enemies barbarians, implying they are stupid, lost a battle of not only brawn, but brains against them and it shook them to the core so much they couldn't comprehend it.

[@kenzo5096]

Because Ymir got the power of titans

[@andreyserebryakov2231]

😅