You are forgiven. LOL

Just blame the error on Livia!!

An error that wouldn't have happen using Roman numerals. 😊

@@jrt818 LOL if only that were true!

The biggest mistake in this story was trusting Arminius! 🗡

I would too but I think you'll have to take it up with the Vatican --- the Christians literally destroyed the pagan gods' rites' instructions and heresiologists left only a few tidbits that leave us wanting more in their polemics against every religion except Imperial Catholic Orthodox Christianity.

I disgree with this premise. You have to consider that this comes RIGHT after the Illyrian rebellion, which already pulled legions from across the empire. Even if they suffered minimal casualties, they were still under strength and had to garrison Illyria to prevent a renewed rebellion. If Augustus committed too many legions to the area, he risked problems in Spain, Gaul and especially against Parthia, who would have no doubt heard of Rome's problems on its northern flank and could have leverged that into a strategic nightmare. The new frontier legions were still settling into their roles, which required them to ingratiate themselves with the locals and establish their residence. Tiberius was extremely wise to be cautious. Germanicus's efforts showed that the Germans were no pushovers and would have fought tooth and nail against Rome, which would have risked the Marcomanni becoming involved. Its not just about having the better military, it's about understanding the limits of logistics and reinforcement. The Rhine and Elbe tribes had the clear advantage if only because of higher morale. It's not until Trajan that the frontier legions were secure enough to send vexilations from all over and still be confident in their remaining numbers. Additionally, there's a reason Augustus reduced the legions from 60 to 25... At some point, too many legions means too many commanders who might decide to rebel. There was no guarantee at this point that the Principate would stand after his death. Those earlier losses that were greater in number all came when Rome's borders were much smaller, especially on its northern flank (basically just coastal Gaul, Spain, and Illyria). Even after Arausio, Marius was able to consolidate the legions and focus on the exposed northen flank because Spain and Africa were both secure and Pontus had yet to make its moves in the East. Pompey, Caesar and the legates of Augustus basically tripled if not quadrupled the empire in about 60 years.

One of Augustus's advice to his successor was NOT to occupy Germania. Tiberius followed that advice.

@@geordiejones5618 I respectably disagree with your disagreeing. :) And sorry if this is not well written. I just finished hours of yard work and I think I have a little heat stroke lol. Nice reply and below is my attempt to explain myself with NO intention to insult you in any way... Your, "If Augustus committed too many legions to the area" doesn't hold up from my point of view. Tiberius quickly had more legions on the Rhine then his brother had while 1st conquering Germania. Just sitting there mostly and then later Germanicus showed what could be done if only he keep going for a few more years. Illyria was decimated, Spain and Parthia were calm for years afterwards and it could be augured that NOT going back in Germania could encourage Parthia and the Marcomanni more not less, being seen as Rome running away. Also "New frontier legions"? There always been frontiers manned by legions and many of these legions now were veterans to one degree to another. "There was no guarantee at this point that the Principate would stand after his death" goes to my point that this happened at a bad time. If it was earlier in Augustus' rein or happened somewhat into his successor's rein (if they weren't lazy Tiberius) this would have just been a terrible speed bump. To put it differently and to say my Main Point: you listed reasons why it would be hard, but I argue that it still could have been done. If when Caesar lost a legion and a half during the winter of 54bc he was recalled to Rome, or if he lost at Alesia and was killed so Gaul was lost and the Romans lost there taste to conquer into Europe and never did, maybe people today would list reasons why it was "impossible" for Rome to conquer Gaul. It would be laughable that they would ever conquer Britain. Rome was a Mediterranean empire only of course (they would say) and never could advance inland.... but we know they did. We know it was hard and they almost lost Britain but they did conquer it. I say Germania was the same as Gaul or Britain. Someone can list out more reasons why it didn't happen, but my point being if this loss didn't happen right at the end of an emperor's rein and certainly if it happened during the Republic, Roman honor would demanded they keep going and they really could have taken Germania. I say the same for Trajan's conquests. If Trajan lived longer or had a son co-emperor for years before he died... but that's another point.

@@John_Pace The advice of an old and dying man. To my point if this happened in 9bce when he was younger instead of 9ce, or even 19ce with a different heir things would have been very different. My whole point is people act as if the roman abandonment of taking Germania was set in stone after this loss because how terrible it was forgetting the 50K+ losses the romans came back from at Cannae or the 80K+ losses at the Battle of Arausio. I say if 20K losses at Teutoburg Forest happened at a different time it would have been a terrible set back, but not so "decisive".

@@willpat3040 True, As Augustus got older, he realised the military limitations of Rome. It was not just Germania, but also the recent Bato wars Illyria, the crushing of the Cantabrians in Hispania, the Parthian threat, the restless Jews, and a lot more issues on Rome's frontier and its internal provinces. Plus the very recent Roman civil wars between Augustus and Anthony and Cleopatra. Not forgetting the ongoing civil unrest in Rome itself. All described in these videos on this channel.

Thank you and welcome!!

And thank you! It seems like you’ve been working your way through the entire project, and that is so appreciated!!! Did you start way back in the stone-age (google voice and internet memes)? Or pick up somewhere in the middle? Either way, we hope you’ve enjoyed the journey!!

It would be betrayed, as Arminius was am officer in the Roman army, had fought for Rome earlier in his career, and had gained the trust of Varus. Straight treachery

The problem is, the Rhine was the beginning of the northern European plains. There's no natural, defensive boundary until the Romans reached the Urals.

@@user-uo7fw5bo1o i’m not european so my european geography knowledge is lacking but what about the elbe?

​@@apocalypseblues3897 You mean the river that goes through Hamburg? No, that's not a good defense either. Rivers seldom are, enemies can build bridges across wherever they please.