Romans in Ireland?

[Chilperic]

If, as stated, Ireland was largely pastoral, then it could, like parts of Germania and those other damp, forested places, prove too costly to bother conquering? In that there are few population concentrations i.e. not enough strategic cities to take and hold to control trade and revenue in relation to the likely income from the place. So the bottom line is the balance sheet rather than anything else?

If my understanding of current readings of Irish society, economy and politics before c.300 is right, then there were a few largeish polities, focussed on ritual sites. These, one imagines, would have been fairly easy to take out. But then what? If one destroyed the links that held those communities together then what? Society would fragment and be difficult to police or govern (shades of Iraq here, if that isn't breaching forum rules). Elsewhere (in Gaul, Britain, and, in a different way, Spain), Rome tended to replace such focal points with new towns and so on, but where was the local produce/surplus going to come from to help build and maintain such new civitas-capitals?

Ireland before the fourth century seems too poor to be able to support any kind of significant Roman military or administrative presence. Roman armies needed to be able to be supported by the area in which they were stationed or campaigning. A similar argument has been presented for the non-occupation of Germania Magna in the early Roman period.

So, yes, if that is a balance sheet, then it doesn't look very promising!

Guy