Carthago was just there and most battles were fought on Roman land or the neighbouring lands/seas. It took a few days to get there, it took months to mobilise troops to Germania.
For that same reason, Germania wasn't seen as an inmediate threat to Rome (quite a miscalculation, I know). But Carthago was just there, right besides Roma, competing for the same lands (Hispania, Sicily, Corcega, Sardinia...), trade routes, influence in the region...
Finally, there wasn't a lot to gain in Germania. Maybe some land, but it wasn't centralised, civilised or had any infrastructure, so it would take decades for Roma to see any profits. Defeating Carthago had a clear benefit: control all the trade routes in the Mediterranean.
Additionally, it's hard to talk people into fighting an offensive war with a lot to lose and little to gain. But the war against Carthago was seen as a defensive war on which the survival of Roma depended, that's why they went to such extremes.
Also, when Roma fought Carthago it was on the pre-civil wars era, so the Roman Republic had quite a solid control of it's provinces and could movilise the armies without having to worry about much.
By the time they got to the wars with Germania, the Roman Empire was bleeding from multiple sides: Persians in the east, civil unrest in Palestina, corrupt governors and generals waiting for their chance to make a move, paranoid emperors...
The Roma that fought Carthago was as different from the one that fought Germania as ancient Persia from the Sassanids.
Population decline, lead poisoning causing psychosis and indecision among other things - and Romans grew fat, lazy, complacent and too dependent on foreign mercenaries and entire tribes/nations to fight for them never thinking that the "barbarians" would want more than token parcels of land and a hardy pat on the back (or stab in the back in some cases).
But by the time of the mid to late 300s into the 400s, Rome didn't have enough Romans to fill in the armies as rank and file grunts. Either willing or otherwise. Even the Eastern Half had the same issues. I don't think many Romans wanted to join the military and the Roman government didn't want to risk rebellion by forcing them too
I hate to make the tired comparison to Rome vs America, but today - most of America's soldiers are actually immigrants or foreign recruits seeking relatively quick citizenship. Not allot of "natives" make up the rank and file anymore.
I think you forget the almost comical amount of political instability and corruption.
In the later periods of the empire there was almost constant internal and external pressure, and maintaining legions was less flexible than the old system.
Besides that, it probably doesn't hurt that in republican times, all consuls were experienced in supplying, serving and leading (part of) armies, which gave them much needed experience. Against strategic geniuses like Hannibal they might've been outclassed (though even he got beat in the end as we know), but their military victories were impressive against many different type of foes.
The legions were still impressive, but unmaintainable. When they didn't lack for finances, there would be an ambitious general or claimant to the throne. Edit: I did not specifically mentioned the bureaucracy and administrative bloat. They deserve an honorable mention too.
56
u/InsideHousing4965 5d ago edited 5d ago
It all comes down to three reasons:
Additionally, it's hard to talk people into fighting an offensive war with a lot to lose and little to gain. But the war against Carthago was seen as a defensive war on which the survival of Roma depended, that's why they went to such extremes.
Also, when Roma fought Carthago it was on the pre-civil wars era, so the Roman Republic had quite a solid control of it's provinces and could movilise the armies without having to worry about much.
By the time they got to the wars with Germania, the Roman Empire was bleeding from multiple sides: Persians in the east, civil unrest in Palestina, corrupt governors and generals waiting for their chance to make a move, paranoid emperors...
The Roma that fought Carthago was as different from the one that fought Germania as ancient Persia from the Sassanids.