If the Celts and Romans switched roles but not personality they would hate the government, and all of the laws and regulations would have made them feel restricted. Most would have wanted to be in the army and only that which would not be possible. They would never have a leader for very long without trying to overthrow him and would succeed at some time in doing so. There would be many civil wars in that civilization. Which is why instead of having a complicated government like the Romans, they were led by those who established themselves as courageous and strong yet successful. It just made sense in their culture for it to be that way. Somehow they thrived living like barbarians and being led the way they were. If they had tried to be like the Romans they could have, and most likely would have failed by infighting and splitting into many different groups and doing things their own way, therefore reestablishing their “barbaric” way of
If the Celts and Romans switched roles but not personality they would hate the government, and all of the laws and regulations would have made them feel restricted. Most would have wanted to be in the army and only that which would not be possible. They would never have a leader for very long without trying to overthrow him and would succeed at some time in doing so. There would be many civil wars in that civilization. Which is why instead of having a complicated government like the Romans, they were led by those who established themselves as courageous and strong yet successful. It just made sense in their culture for it to be that way. Somehow they thrived living like barbarians and being led the way they were. If they had tried to be like the Romans they could have, and most likely would have failed by infighting and splitting into many different groups and doing things their own way, therefore reestablishing their “barbaric” way of