According to the following map of the Roman Republic/Empire (after Caesar's conquests?), certain areas which were entirely or almost entirely enclosed by Rome were independent. How true was this?

by MetalusVerne

Link

Of note are the areas labeled Iberius F., Thracia, Panphilia, and of course, that odd curved region in the alps between Italia and Gallia. Were these regions really 'independent', or were they so thoroughly under Roman dominion that they were Roman in all but name?

XenophonTheAthenian

This isn't really a very good map, because although it's pretty detailed it doesn't mark any of the client-states, especially the extremely confusing jumble of client-kingdoms in Asia Minor and the Levant. The Roman state of the late Republic controlled, in addition to their direct possessions, a whole host of small client-states, most of which were absorbed later by Augustus and his successors. This map shows none of them. Client-states acted rather like protectorates--they were nominally independent and ruled by whatever governing body was traditionally in charge, but they owed direct allegiance to the Roman state and usually paid them tribute. The tribute was often a big deal--one of Pompey's intentions in setting up client-kingdoms personally loyal to him alone in the territories he had won in the Mithridatic Wars was that the tribute which he would receive would vastly outweigh any taxes that he could collect from a province (although Crassus was reputed to be the wealthiest man in Rome, after Pompey's campaigns in Asia Minor he was far wealthier than Crassus could ever have imagined). Notable client-states that are not marked here are the kingdom of Thrace; the assortment of client-states in Pontus, Galatia, and Cappadocia (note that Cilicia was a Roman province. The Romans would've left Cilicia--which was pretty poor and not worth holding--alone if it weren't a hotbed for pirates, which forced Pompey to seize it); Judaea (and technically Egypt, which Caesar had secured as a client-kingdom loyal only to him); the Tauric Chersonese (Crimea); the lowland client-states in Britain, mainly centered around Kent and of dubious loyalty; and a tangle of clients among the tribal areas of the eastern bank of the Rhine. I'm unsure why the Alpine provinces are labelled white here--they were most definitely Roman provinces by this time (you can actually see the borders of the three provinces if you look closely) and the only reason I can come up with for why they're white is that nobody really went there. The map also leaves out close allies of the Roman state which would become client-states very soon. Both Mauretania and Numidia had been Roman allies for quite some time and both soon would become clients and later would be absorbed. Technically Numidia was ruled by Mauretania after Jugurtha's rebellion, but under Augustus Numidia was more or less absorbed, with Mauretania becoming a client-kingdom that Claudius later annexed. As for that funky region of northern Iberia, what is known as Basque-country today, that's kind of complicated. Technically that region was a client-state, but none of the inhabitants really cared and it was more or less independent. There's not really anything there besides angry Iberians, so the Romans didn't bother pacifying it until Augustus, when they attempted to raid the Roman provinces in Iberia, which was inexcusable