Julius Caeser survives assasination, then what?

[oberstklein]

Greetings,
I just wanted to pose a question to everyone. What if Julius Caeser had survived or been able to thwart the assasination of the Ides of March, 44 BC?
From what I have read, Caesar had planned a rather large campaign against the Parthians and Armenians. Assuming (a big assumption) his legions were victorious against the Parthians, would Caesar have:

A) Continued his campaign against the Armenians, circling around the Black Sea (fighting the Sarmatians, Scythians, etc) or..

B) Continued his campaign by taking over the whole of the Parthian empire?

The second option has intriguing possibilities...A Rome-controlled Parthian territory for ..Imagine having almost half the ancient Silk Road under Roman control. What sort of exchanges would have taken place between East/West? What effect would this have had on Rome's evolution? Could Rome even have effectively controlled this vast region?

[Mikestone8]

I think any discussion of what he might do after conquering Parthia is pretty theoretical. Parthia would be a huge job, making Gaul look like a Sunday School outing, and would keep him occupied for years - almost certainly for the rest of his life.

As to the effects - territorially probably much the same as when Trajan invades a century or so later. Caesar conquers Msopotamia and probably Armenia, but when he dies, the resulting bout of civil war means his conquests can't be held. Whoever replaces him (Augustus? Antony?) pulls out as Hadrian did.

One interesting maybe, though. If the Parthian War is hard-fought enough, does Parthia break down internally as it was to do in the 3C? Could something like the Sassanid dynasty - a revived Kingdom of Persia -emerge three centuries earlier?

[Chengar Qordath]

As to the effects - territorially probably much the same as when Trajan invades a century or so later. Caesar conquers Msopotamia and probably Armenia, but when he dies, the resulting bout of civil war means his conquests can't be held. Whoever replaces him (Augustus? Antony?) pulls out as Hadrian did.
That assumes there would be a succession war in the first place; I think it is reasonably likely that Caesar would devote some effort to cultivating an heir in his later years so that things would not fall apart after he dies.

[Rex Romanum]

Well, I recommend you to Eric's excellent TL, A Much Larger Rome that Survives until the Present Day.

[carlton_bach]

That assumes there would be a succession war in the first place; I think it is reasonably likely that Caesar would devote some effort to cultivating an heir in his later years so that things would not fall apart after he dies.

Who says people would let him? The atmosphere in the 30s BC (and he's not that likely to live longer) is a very different beast from the 10s AD. His first challenge would be to arrange it so he can have a succession in any meaningful way. Otherwise, the Julii Caesares are going to be another of the glorious episodes in the story of the Roman Republic. Maybe not even that glorious, especially if he fails to secure victory in Parthia. The Roman army is good, but it's neither invincible nor immune to mutiny.

[mailinutile2]

>Julius Caeser survives assasination, then what?

1) Either he turn to the Sulla path (that meaning restoring the republic after ensuing new laws to re-inforce his political part - only this time it is populares rathar than aristocrats)
2) or, there is another assassination attempt

[Mikestone8]

That assumes there would be a succession war in the first place; I think it is reasonably likely that Caesar would devote some effort to cultivating an heir in his later years so that things would not fall apart after he dies.


When does he get the chance if he's committed himself to a huge war in the east?

[Jammy]

Well, I recommend you to Eric's excellent TL, A Much Larger Rome that Survives until the Present Day.

Agreed. Brilliant TL

[oberstklein]

Thank you all for your replies. They were both informative and stimulating.
Have a wonderful weekend,

:D

[Chengar Qordath]

When does he get the chance if he's committed himself to a huge war in the east?
A lot is going to depend on the course of his war with Parthia; it could be a complete quagmire that consumes Caesar's entire reign and burns away his political power, or it could go reasonably well for him. Arguably the best possible outcome would be if Caesar won a couple quick victories, and then returned to Rome while leaving the rest of the campaign to Antony or another trusted subordinate.

Incidentally, between the fact that his reign is going to be fairly military-focused and the fact that Julius would need to be much more careful about avoiding any semblance of monarchism, setting up Antony (or another general) as his successor seems much more likely. A general who got a reasonable share of battlefield glory in Pathia would certainly have a good start at being a viable successor to Caesar.

[John Fredrick Parker]

One thing that isn't controversial is that the Republic is definitively done for at this point.

(Sorry if that seems like stating the obvious, I've come across statements before and elsewhere that the assassination was "the end of the republic"...) :rolleyes:

[Grey Wolf]

I thought he was off to Dacia next?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

[Eurofed]

I thought he was off to Dacia next?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

He meant to conquer both Parthia and Germania-Dacia, but I don't remember which one was due first in his plans.

[mikegold]

Agreed. Brilliant TL

It is, very. :)

[Mikestone8]

He meant to conquer both Parthia and Germania-Dacia, but I don't remember which one was due first in his plans.


Can't quote chapter and verse, but I'm pretty sure Parthia came first. It was only nine years since Carrhae, and that couldn't be left unavenged.

Of course, the Parthians might have tried to buy him off by returning the Eagles which they captured at Carrhae. That worked with Augustus. Whether it could have worked with Julius is another matter.

[carlton_bach]

Can't quote chapter and verse, but I'm pretty sure Parthia came first.. It was only nine years since Carrhae, and thta couldn't be left unavenged.

Of course, the Parthians might have tried to buy him off by returning the Eagles which they captured at Carrhae. That worked with Augustus. Whether it could have worked with Julius is another matter.

I very much doubt it. Augustus was a brilliant politician whose horizon was pretty much Rome. Caesar was a military leader, he enjoyed war and craved victory. Also, both he and his army knew there was loot to be had in the Parthian kingdom, and with the supreme confidence he had in his abilities (not a luxury Augustus enjoyed), it's quite unlikely he'd settle for less than a significant victory.

Of course, he might well cpompletely miss the mood of the people that way. The Pax Augusta/Prosperitas Augusta idea was very smart propaganda, it's quite possible that the people of Italy (not to mention the rest of the Empire) are at best tepid towards any great victories and hostile to new conscription. Sure, they'll cheer a winner, but that's no recipe for a stable succession. Especially if military glory is then required for successorship. Who will Antony invade to prove his mettle? Who will Antony's successor? Perpetuating the mechanism behind the Republic's military expansionism isn't really a very bright idea, given how baly stretched its resources were.

On the other hand, a quasi-charismatic military kingship is very interesting historically, while it lasts. Doubt it will last very long.

[Chengar Qordath]

The Pax Augustus was so wildly popular because Rome had been in a state of near-constant civil war ever since the death of Julius. I doubt the populace was anywhere near as war-weary in Julius's time as they would be in Augustus's.

[Mikestone8]

The Pax Augustus was so wildly popular because Rome had been in a state of near-constant civil war ever since the death of Julius.

And for most of the half century before that. Viz Marius and Sulla

[Chengar Qordath]

And for most of the half century before that. Viz Marius and Sulla
True. Putting a stop to Rome's internal political violence and civil wars is probably a lot more important to winning over the war-weary portions of the populace than stopping any foreign adventurism.

[oberstklein]

I very much doubt it. Augustus was a brilliant politician whose horizon was pretty much Rome. Caesar was a military leader, he enjoyed war and craved victory. Also, both he and his army knew there was loot to be had in the Parthian kingdom, and with the supreme confidence he had in his abilities (not a luxury Augustus enjoyed), it's quite unlikely he'd settle for less than a significant victory.

Of course, he might well cpompletely miss the mood of the people that way. The Pax Augusta/Prosperitas Augusta idea was very smart propaganda, it's quite possible that the people of Italy (not to mention the rest of the Empire) are at best tepid towards any great victories and hostile to new conscription. Sure, they'll cheer a winner, but that's no recipe for a stable succession. Especially if military glory is then required for successorship. Who will Antony invade to prove his mettle? Who will Antony's successor? Perpetuating the mechanism behind the Republic's military expansionism isn't really a very bright idea, given how baly stretched its resources were.

On the other hand, a quasi-charismatic military kingship is very interesting historically, while it lasts. Doubt it will last very long.

I have to agree with this one... Throughout his life, Caesar was a great admirer of Alexander the Great, wanting to emulate his accomplishments. This was pretty much the main reason why I started this thread to begin with. As I understand it, Caesar had already named Octavian to be his heir, before the Ides of March. What would all think of an alternate timeline, one in which Caesar does pursue a campaign against the Parthians? I would welcome any input. Has this timeline been done before?

[Umbric Man]

No, it's not been.

One thing to throw out: the Parthians, even while Hellenophile to a degree, are still primarily Persian-Aryan in culture, compared to all the Hellenic and Celtic states Rome had conquered till then and were vaguely-to-closely related to in linguistics and culture. If any territory is to be kept, it's probably what Trajan swiped-Armenia for sure (the traditional prize and hot potato in Roman-Parthian wars), and probably Mesopotamia/Assyria. Those were the most Greco-Roman-like areas and easiest to assimilate and hold down compared to beyond in Parthia/Persia proper: a hostile, alien populace with its own very long, very proud ethnic and imperial identity.

Remember Trajan did in fact take down the Parthian king of his time and had captured the capital Ctesiphon; he merely installed a new puppet king for the rest of Parthia on the Iranian Plateau. Caesar might be-I rather like to think he is-wily enough to do that and then focus on rebuilding and stablizing the rest of Rome with his Gallic, Mesopotamian, Armenian, and loyalist-Roman resources he now has.