What was the easiest conquest of the Romans in your opinion?

>>2565038
What you said is completely wrong but I think the easiest Roman conquest was Judaea since by then it was only petty Jewish states and the dying Seleucid empire. Granted that substantial rebellions would be a thing later on.

File: 1490496782248.png (518KB, 1232x1024px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 1232x1024px

Wasn't Ukraine the bread basket of Europe?

Why did Roman never settle in that place?

>>2565122
Meh Elezar tried his hardest to rally the people but most of them told him to gtfo.

Then he went and hid in Masada which was comfy until the Romans built a fucking ramp.

>A FUCKING RAMP!

>>2565132
Scythians were too scary.

>>2565132
>Seizing flat, indefensible land from steppe nomads with no other apparent resources

It just wouldn't have been worth it.

>>2565132
Rome was an empire based on the Mediterranean. The inland regions like Gaul and Britannia were always the underdeveloped and economically underperforming frontier regions. Pushing inland to modern Germany, Ukraine, etc. which had no trade routes with anyone and no resources of note except tons of barbarians wasn't in their interests.

>>2565144
>>2565149
What abhorrent Grain from Ukraine. I'm pretty sure that Athens traded grain with the people there, to the point where it helped save them after the Peloponnesian war.

File: Masada-sites.jpg (58KB, 588x435px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 588x435px

>>2565135

And that fucking ramp is still there today

God bless the Romans

>>2565170
about*

>>2565170
They already had Egypt for that.

>>2565149
>Gaul
>economically underperforming

looooooooooool gaul boomed under the romans and quickly became the manpower fount for the entire empire

File: Per-capita-gdp-in-roman-times-according-to-maddison-1990-ppp-dollars1.jpg (33KB, 720x451px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 720x451px

>>2565190

>>2565200
>14 AD

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool okay you clearly have an agenda (probably MUH CELTIC HURRITAGE) so I won't even bother commenting how wrong you are

>>2565200
14AD marked the death of the first Roman Emperor. Gaul boomed from that point on and by 61AD a Gaulish governor had the wealth, resources and manpower to very nearly overthrow Emperor Nero.

>>2565212
what's wrong with it showing 14 AD?

File: tfwtoosmart.png (97KB, 179x402px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 179x402px

>>2565200
>all the inland regions are poor
>all the Med-bordering regions except northwest Africa are average to rich
>the absolute dirt poorest are the parts of Germania
>what would later become the ERE is much richer than what would later become the WRE

Really makes you think.

>>2565038
Not really. Caesar had to give up on his invasion, and Claudius only succeded because trade between Britain and Gaul ensured that the Iceni and co. welcomed the Romans with open arms.

With the exception of Athens Greece was probably easier, considering how it fell almost immediately after the Romans massacred the Macedonians during a truce.

>>2565122
No. Judea was a fucking nightmare to conquer.

>>2565224
It's Augustus' death. Gaul had been conquered for only 60ish years by that point. It is a poor map to use when taking the entire history Roman Empire into account because literally any historian would tell you within 50 years it had become one of Rome's richest provinces.