Interauctoritas et Renovatio (A Roman TL)

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Augustus’ Empire)

“There is no boon that men can desire of the gods or gods grant to mankind, no conceivable wish or blessing which Octavian did not bestow on the Republic, the Roman people, and the world.” – Marcus Velleius Paterculus

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Statue-Augustus.jpg/220px-Statue-Augustus.jpg

The period following the defeat of Mark Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium, culminating in their suicides in Egypt, has typically been referred to by historians as the Interauctoritas (latin, inter – “between” auctoritas – “authority”). The reforms instituted by Octavian would transform the nature of the Roman Republic fundamentally, and would come to be referred to more broadly as the Roman Principate.

Octavian returned to Rome from his victory in Egypt in 29 BC and promptly celebrated a triumph. The Senate voted him a triumphal arch inscribed re publica conservata (‘The Republic Saved’) and confirmed his election as Consul once again (from 31 to 27 BC). More than that though, the Senate awarded to him the official title Imperator. Octavian was the most powerful man in Rome, with no military or political rivals whatsoever.

However, for the ambitious Octavian this was not enough and in 27 BC Octavian resigned his positions of power and offered his resignation to the Senate. In what was clearly designed to be a political move, the Senate begged for him to stay and he agreed to retain control of Spain, Gaul and Syria (he already controlled Egypt as a personal territory independent of Rome). This was no accident but carefully crafted, for the bulk of the Roman legions were stationed in these regions. He also kept control of Rome’s foreign policy by assuming the right to declare war and negotiate peace or other foreign treaties. It was at this time that he assumed the name “Augustus”, a political masterstroke with quasi-religious overtones (augustus – “majestic/august/honourable”). He described his ascendancy thus:

“Henceforth, I exceeded all men in authority (auctoritas), but I had no greater power than those who were my colleagues in any given magistracy.” – Augustus, Res Gestae (34)

Octavian (henceforth referred to as Augustus) was a consummate politician and statesmen. He was careful to maintain Republican protocol, even though in reality his power was absolute and autocratic. His preferred title (in addition to all his other titles), was that of Princeps (‘first citizen/first among equals’). This allowed him to present a clear title with, it was hoped, reasonable Republican precedents.

Although it may have won over the masses and perhaps even the Senate, not all were wholly convinced. Tacitus considered him as a power-crazed hypocrite, concealing his autocratic behaviour under a façade of republicanism. Even the future Emperor Nero Claudius Drusus, and Augustus’ own stepson, was known to have authored a letter criticising his leadership.

Nonetheless the pretence of republicanism is an important distinction. It provided a sense of legitimacy to his rule, maintained clear and concise links with the Roman Republic, and paved the way for future republican reforms that his successors would champion. Although the reign of Augustus may have been a Monarchy in all but name, no future Emperor would ever wield as much power at his height. For that reason historians generally refer to the Roman State in this period as the Roman Principate, rather than formally as the Roman Empire. The Republican era had ended, but with it a new beginning had taken its place.

[Arrix85]

Although the reign of Augustus may have been a Monarchy in all but name, no future Emperor would ever wield as much power at his height. For that reason historians generally refer to the Roman State in this period as the Roman Principate, rather than formally as the Roman Empire. The Republican era had ended, but with it a new beginning had taken its place.

This detail sure makes it a quite interesting idea. I'll keep an eye on it.

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Augustus’ Empire)

“Twice Augustus seriously thought of restoring the republic: immediately after the fall of Antony, when he remembered that Antony had often accused him of being the one obstacle to such a change, and again when he could not shake an exhausting illness. He then actually summoned the chief magistrates and the Senate to his house and gave them a faithful account of the military and financial state of the empire. On reconsideration, however, he decided that to divide the responsibilities of government among several hands would be to jeopardize not only his own life but also national security; so he did nothing.” –Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars Divus Augustus 28.

http://artinvestment.ru/content/download/news_2010/20101015_gonzaga.jpg

Despite Augustus’ supreme position in Rome, he was never at ease in relation to who should succeed him. Augustus had no male children of his own, his second wife Scribonia conceived his only natural child Julia the Elder. The question of succession was problematic for Augustus throughout his entire reign, but it was especially so in 23 BC due to a sudden illness.

He had arranged for his daughter to marry her cousin Marcus Claudius Marcellus two years earlier. Marcellus was the only male child to Augustus’ sister Octavia the Younger, and it was well known that Augustus admired him greatly. It is possible that Augustus intended him for the succession, having allowed Marcellus to stand for election as a Consul ten years earlier then was customary and supporting his election as Aedile in 23 BC. However, historians generally contend that at this point Augustus favoured his friend and colleague Marcus Agrippa to succeed him. The situation was further complicated by the fact that Agrippa had left Rome shortly after Marcellus’ marriage, possibly in a move motivated by jealousy. In any event the crisis did not eventuate. Augustus’ health was restored later that year and Marcellus died of a serious illness. Of his death the historian Cassius Dio writes:

Augustus gave him a public burial after the customary eulogies, placing him in the tomb he was building, and as a memorial to him finished the theatre whose foundations had already been laid by the former Caesar and which was now called the theatre of Marcellus. And he ordered also that a golden image of the deceased, a golden crown, and a curule chair should be carried into the theatre at the Ludi Romani and should be placed in the midst of the officials having charge of the games.
This he did later; at the time, after being restored to health, he brought his will into the senate and desired to read it, by way of showing people that he had left no successor to his realm; but he did not read it, for none would permit it. Absolutely everybody, however, was astonished at him because, although he loved Marcellus both as son-in law and nephew, and in addition to other honours shown him had to such an extent helped him make a brilliant success of the festival which he gave as aedile that he had sheltered the Forum during the whole summer by means of curtains stretched overhead and had exhibited on the stage a dancer who was a knight, and also a woman of high birth, nevertheless he had not entrusted to him the monarchy, but actually had preferred Agrippa before him. Thus it would appear that he was not yet confident of the youth's judgment, and that he either wished the people to regain their liberty or for Agrippa to receive the leadership from them. Dio Cassius (53.30)

The death of Marcellus prompted the return of Marcus Agrippa to Rome and Augustus compelled him to marry his daughter Julia. The marriage produced five children, including three sons: Gaius Caesar, Lucius Caesar and Postumus Agrippa (born after Agrippa’s death), and two daughters: Julia and Agrippina. Augustus adopted Gaius and Lucius and brought them up in his home, after buying them from Agrippa in a symbolic sale.

When Agrippa died in 12 BC at the age of 51, Augustus sought a new son-in law and forced his stepson Tiberius to marry Julia. This necessitated a divorce between Tiberius and his first wife Vipsania Agrippina (Marcus Agrippa’s daughter). This would have important ramifications later on, for Tiberius loved Vipsania and greatly disapproved of Julia. An embarrassing event was described when Tiberius, years after the divorce, accidently caught sight of Vipsania and followed her with tears in his eyes and intense unhappiness written on his face that Augustus took precautions against his ever seeing her again.

Despite this unpleasant event, Tiberius continued to be elevated by Augustus. His first major civil functions began with his representations in the Senate as an advocate of the Laodiceans, Thyatirans and Chians who requested assistance due to heavy economic damage from an earthquake. He is also recorded as having acted as prosecutor against Fannius Caepio and Varro Murena for plotting against Augustus, where he secured their charges of treason. During this same period he undertook two special commissions: a reorganisation of the defective grain supply and to investigate the status of slave barracks throughout Italia.

In 12 BC he received military commissions in Pannonnia and Germania. The first of these campaigns brought about the subjugation of the Breuci and Dalmatae; and in the second he campaigned directly with his younger brother and future Emperor Nero Drusus against the Chatti and the Sicambri. Tiberius and Drusus enjoyed a close relationship throughout their lives and the two brothers met together, along with Augustus, at Lugdunum in 10 BC. Both brothers enjoyed considerable patronage from Augustus, and although Drusus was to earn Augustus’ lasting favour, in those earlier days Tiberius was foisted with more honours.

Drusus returned with the party to Rome and was elected consul in 9 BC. However, Drusus was ever dissatisfied with the political climate in the capital and yearned to return to soldiering. Consequently, he returned to his military command and continued his campaign in Germania. He subsequently defeated the Chatti in 9 BC but was forced to temporarily retreat across the Rhine after suffering a defeat against the Marcomanni. It is recorded that he fell from his horse shortly thereafter where he suffered a serious enough injury to delay his military actions. He took some time to recover before he was able to resume his campaign and inflict a significant defeat on the Marcomanni, avenging his earlier loss. [1]

----
[1] The POD

[Cuāuhtemōc]

Hm. This is a rather unknown POD, at least for someone like who doesn't know too much about late Republic/early Empire-era Roman history but this seems like a timeline worth following. You've caught my attention!

I can't wait for more!

[galileo-034]

I attempted to do something with this POD before beginning Gods and Empires.
In that scenario, the survival of Drusus led him to command the Roman troops against the Illyrians instead of Tiberius, the latter being appointed in Germania Magna instead of Varus. Tiberius would have been a far better administrator than Varus and would surely not have alienated the German tribes, and Arminius would remain a loyal ally of Rome.

The next step, if not yet done, would be subjugating the Marcomans in order to complete the conquests aimed at establishing a shorter and more defensible border on the Albis (Elbe).

[Jonathan Edelstein]

So Drusus survives. There were some indications that he had republican sympathies, weren't there?

I could see this going a couple of ways. The simplest would be for Drusus to become emperor and decline some of Augustus' powers. Alternatively, he and Tiberius could become a de facto, or even de jure, duumvirate: in effect, consuls for life. This could ensure that no one man gets too much authority (while at the same time maintaining continuity rather than annual turnovers of power) and Drusus could restrain some of Tiberius' baser instincts.

I'm definitely looking forward to more of this.

[galileo-034]

I wonder if Caligula is butterflied. If the republican elements are stronger, we can wonder about the 'attempt' of restoration of the Republic after the death of Caligula.

[euromellows]

Thank you for the interest. I've enjoyed writing it thus far, but I've probably enjoyed reading in more detail such a fascinating era that inspired the TL.

I propose to respond to each of the points below:

galileo-034 wrote:
I attempted to do something with this POD before beginning Gods and Empires.
In that scenario, the survival of Drusus led him to command the Roman troops against the Illyrians instead of Tiberius, the latter being appointed in Germania Magna instead of Varus. Tiberius would have been a far better administrator than Varus and would surely not have alienated the German tribes, and Arminius would remain a loyal ally of Rome.

The next step, if not yet done, would be subjugating the Marcomans in order to complete the conquests aimed at establishing a shorter and more defensible border on the Albis (Elbe).

Thanks for your post. I've been following your own excellent timeline 'Gods and Empires' so your interest is high praise indeed. What you've proposed is actually very sensible and I agree with your conclusion. Varus was an exceptionally cruel administrator who needlessly antagonised his subjects. His military incompetence exacerbated the disaster. I'm not entirely sure Arminius would stay loyal, he would still be a dangerous ally to keep around - but certainly Drusus and Tiberius would be far too canny to allow him to manipulate them.

Jonathan Edelstein wrote:
So Drusus survives. There were some indications that he had republican sympathies, weren't there?

I could see this going a couple of ways. The simplest would be for Drusus to become emperor and decline some of Augustus' powers. Alternatively, he and Tiberius could become a de facto, or even de jure, duumvirate: in effect, consuls for life. This could ensure that no one man gets too much authority (while at the same time maintaining continuity rather than annual turnovers of power) and Drusus could restrain some of Tiberius' baser instincts.

I'm definitely looking forward to more of this.

Indeed. Drusus was well known for his republican sympathies, he was even known to have stated if he was in power he would restore the republic. A letter apparently written to his brother lamented the political climate of Rome and proposed the two convince Augustus to surrender power to the Senate.

I have an idea of how the republican reforms will be achieved but for now would like to maintain the element of surprise and gradually reveal it through the timeline. Your guess is pretty good though.

galileo-034 wrote:
I wonder if Caligula is butterflied. If the republican elements are stronger, we can wonder about the 'attempt' of restoration of the Republic after the death of Caligula.

The reign of Caligula will indeed be butterflied, but he will make an appearance and maintain his infamous reputation, albeit his antics affecting vastly fewer people.

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Augustus’ Empire)

“Their shields are black, their bodies dyed. They choose dark nights for battle, and, by the dread and gloomy aspect of their death-like host, strike terror into the foe, who can never confront their strange and almost infernal appearance.” – Tacitus, Germania (98.43)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Ancient_German_Family.jpg/300px-Ancient_German_Family.jpg

The Roman pacification of Germania was a long and gradual process. Unlike Gaul and Hispania, Germania was not as technologically advanced or as economically developed. While there were urban centres of limited value, there were no great cities to pacify where resistance could be snuffed out in a decisive strike. The level of agriculture too was undeveloped and unlikely to fill the needs of a romanised population. Nevertheless it was Roman policy in the early Principate period to expand into this great land, and Augustus entrusted this policy to his best generals.

The Germanic peoples comprised several different tribes that in some circumstances united, but generally for the most part did not. On the one hand it deprived the Romans of subjugating a single enemy in which the region could be dominated, but on the other hand the Romans were able to exploit this to great effect. As we have already seen, the Roman General Drusus had, by 9 BC, inflicted serious defeats on the Chatti, Sicambri and the Hermunduri tribes. However the Germanic peoples had developed, not wholly undeserved, a ferocious reputation for resistance and stubbornness. To those other Germanic tribes that resisted in this time were the Bructeri, Cherusci, Cauci and Marcomanni. The most dangerous of these was the Marcomanni.

In 9 BC the Marcomannic King Maroboduus, earlier in his life a hostage of Rome, convinced his people to escape to Boihaemum (hereafter referred to as Bohemia) and thereby escape Roman subjugation. The Marcomanni displaced the celtic Boeii tribe in Bohemia that same year and caused a large exodus to flee to Roman lands. There Maroboduus created a powerful kingdom amongst the natural woodland and mountain ranges of that country, complete with alliances of neighbouring Germanic tribes.

According to the Greek geographer Strabo, at one time Augustus showed great favour to Maroboduus during his youth in Rome and it seems likely that Augustus was quite aware of his formidable skills. Already in this time the Marcomanni were reported to display a martial discipline quite unlike their other Germanic cousins. Modern historians have speculated, with varying degrees of certainty, that Maroboduus may have at one time served as an auxilia prefect. This could certainly explain part of the reasoning for Augustus’ desire to conquer. However, in all likelihood this was only an ancillary consideration in light of the strategic position and potential threat that the Marcomanni now possessed in their new home.

Regardless of the particular reasons, in 6 BC Augustus authorised the subjugation of this new kingdom and assigned Tiberius and Gaius Saturninus, a General of Senatorial rank, seven legions in total. Tiberius planned for a pincer strike against the Marcomanni. Setting out with four legions to the northwest, the army was split and Tiberius invaded the Marcomanni from the east. General Saturninus advanced from the west with the remaining three legions. The Marcomanni were unable to resist, and though at first they were successful at avoiding pitched battles, Tiberius enclosed the trap and smashed the stubborn tribesmen. For his success here Augustus offered him a triumph, but he declined the honour.

While this was happening his brother Drusus continued his campaign further north in Germany. Although desperate to join Tiberius against the Marcomanni (for Drusus had much experience against them), he was busy enough with his own problems. The Bructeri launched a punitive raid against the encampments on the Rhine and Drusus responded in force. A capable and popular commander, Drusus smashed the Bructeri in 6 BC and convinced his men to once again pursue the enemy across the Weser. The Bructeri sought refuge with the Cauci who added their own arms against Rome. Having secured the neutrality of the Cherusci through their pro-Roman chieftain Segestas, Drusus met the combined Bructeri-Cauci tribes near the mouth of the Albis (Elbe) and completely routed the enemy allowing none to escape. The northern German tribes thus being pacified after almost five years of campaigning Drusus was voted the cognomen ‘Germanicus’ to be held by himself and his descendants in perpetuity. Drusus accepted the honor reluctantly and reportedly only after a deputation of his own soldiers would not allow him to refuse, such was the esteem he was held by those under his command.

Meanwhile, despite the great successes on the Germanic frontier a more pressing crisis distracted Augustus’ attentions closer to home – that of the succession.

[mrmandias]

Quite good. Subscribed.

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Augustus’ Empire)

“He was ‘tristissimus hominum’, the gloomiest of men and thrusted into a life he never really wanted. The unfortunate Tiberius was forced to divorce the woman he loved, compelled to marry a woman he despised, and expected to adopt the tyranny of authority he never desired” – Pliny the Elder, Natural Histories XXVIII (5.23) [1]

http://0.tqn.com/d/ancienthistory/1/0/Z/S/2/Tiberius.jpg


After Tiberius’ successful campaign against the Marcomanni he returned to Rome at the end of 6 BC and was voted tribunician power for five years and imperium in the East. These were great honours previously bestowed on Agrippa. Yet even with all these honours, at the height of his career and in the prime of his life he suddenly decided to retire from politics as completely as possible.

Although there were several principle reasons possible for his self-imposed retirement, in all likelihood the sudden decision was motivated by a combination of factors. First there was his unhappy marriage to Julia, in which he was deeply unhappy and resentful. The extent of his feelings was only revealed after the passing of Augustus, and even then only in private to his brother. A letter from that time reveals the deep loathing Tiberius beared for Julia, and his inability to charge her with adultery or divorce for her scandalous behaviour due to being the daughter of Augustus.

Secondly there were contemporary allegations made that the retirement was a cynical ploy to increase his reputation by a prolonged absence, so that the need of his services would become apparent to Augustus.

Finally another theory is that the coming of age of Augustus’ adopted children, Gaius and Lucius, compelled Tiberius to voluntarily resign his position as the successor to the Roman State and leave the political field open to them. Marcus Agrippa had done the same thing when Marcellus had begun his public career – retiring to Mytilene so as to not be mistaken for a rival. Whether Tiberius was really motivated by jealousy or a magnanimous duty to the state will probably never be known. Certainly he gave the latter reason for his decision at a later date. At the time, however, he merely applied for leave of absence on the ground that he was weary of office and needed to rest.

It did not occur to Tiberius that he may be making a mistake, such was the depths of his misery at that time. It is known that his mother, the Empress Livia, pleaded for him not to leave. Even Augustus openly complained in the Senate that this was an act of desertion. Suetonious reports that these events had little effect on him:

“On the contrary, he defeated their vigorous efforts to blunt his resolution by a four days’ hunger strike. In the end he sailed off; leaving his wife and son behind at Rome, he hurried down to Ostia without saying a word to any of the friends who came to say goodbye, and kissing only very few of them before he went aboard his ship.” – Suetonious, The Twelve Caesars Tiberius (10.19)

There were contemporary stories, likely apocryphal, that Augustus went so far as to stage a serious illness in order to motivate Tiberius’ immediate return. The news of Augustus’ illness reached Tiberius off the coast of Campania, where it is recorded he cast anchor for a while. It is known that Tiberius received a letter from his brother Drusus at this time, urging him to reconsider his folly but also conceding the great unhappiness to which he was burdened. Tiberius awaited further reports of Augustus’ illness, but when rumours and accusations reached him that he was merely waiting in the hope of seizing power he immediately departed for Rhodes.

Although the many stories and rumours of the lamentation of Augustus at this time such as the above were likely not true, the circulation of such stories illustrate the great anxiety for which Augustus felt at the time. Augustus was 57 years old by this point, several years older than Agrippa when he had passed and this was something which tormented his mind to no avail. With the departure of Tiberius there was no clear successor in place. His adopted sons were still in their teens, and Drusus, although a stepson and given considerable honours by this point, had not yet been officially adopted as heir. It is clear the retirement of Tiberius was almost disastrous for Augustus’ succession plans, and it was an act for which Augustus would never forgive him.

Tiberius had chosen Rhodes as his place of exile, apparently cherishing pleasant memories of the island during his return voyage from Armenia. He is reported to have resided within a modest town house and modest country villa. Accounts from this time also indicate that he would dismiss his lictors and staff members and stroll about the gymnasium, greeting and chatting with ordinary Greeks as if they were his social equals.

Although Tiberius still held tribunician power he is recorded to have only used it once in his stay at Rhodes. It is understood that Tiberius frequented the schools and halls where professors lectured and would listen to the discussions. On one occasion when two sophists started a violent argument, an audience member abused him for daring to intervene and support one sophist over another. Tiberius retired to his house, when he shortly reappeared with a group of lictors where the man was arrested and set before a tribunal.

In 2BC Tiberius learnt of the exile of his erstwhile wife Julia. Julia had been arrested for adultery and treason, and Augustus sent her a letter in Tiberius’ name declaring the marriage null and void. He also indicated before the Senate that she had been plotting against his own life with one of her lovers, namely Iullus Antonius (son of Mark Antony and Fulvia). Iullus Antonius was forced to commit suicide and Julia herself was exiled to the tiny island of Padateria. She was forbidden to drink wine, and was permitted no guests without express permission of Augustus. After five years she was transferred to the mainland where she received milder treatment, but Augustus never entertained her recall from exile. On one occasion when the Roman people interceded on her behalf he retorted before a popular assembly, ‘May the gods curse you with daughters as lecherous as mine, and with wives as adulterous!’

Although it is clear that Tiberius bore no affection for his wife, he nonetheless felt it his duty, even in exile, to urge reconciliation between Augustus and her. Despite Tiberius knowing of her scandalous nature and being privately of the belief she deserved her fate, he appeared to embrace the image of a merciful husband and allowed her to keep whatever presents she had at any time received from him. It is possible he embraced this image to influence Augustus own treatment of him. For by this stage Tiberius had seen the error of his decision and he is known to have asked Augustus leave to return and visit his family, who he greatly missed, and he confessed at last that he departed to Rhodes only to escape the suspicion of rivalry with Gaius and Lucius. Since both were now adults and acknowledged heirs, his reasons for staying away from Rome were no longer valid. Augustus, however, turned down his request, telling him to abandon all concern for his family, who he had been so eager to desert.

Thus it was that Tiberius remained, most reluctantly, at Rhodes. He communicated frequently with his brother and his mother, both of whom could not persuade Augustus to award him the title of Legate as an official cloak for his disfavour after his tribunician powers expired. His days were shrouded with anxiety. He lived a quiet private life in the country, avoiding contact with important persons who happened to land at Rhodes. His sedentary lifestyle was afforded a welcome reprieve in 1BC when he visited his brother and stepbrother Gaius at the nearby island of Samos. Gaius had been made a commander of the East, and was on route to Anatolia to entreat with the Parthian King Phraates V. Drusus accompanied Gaius for part of the journey so as to meet with Tiberius and to deal with the Parthian King. Furthermore, by this stage Drusus’ daughter Livilla had married Gaius and as his father in law the two men were known to be close.

Despite the happy occasion there was an incident of note which provoked the attention of Augustus. Allegedly one of Gaius’ favourites, his former guardian Marcus Lollius, spread slanderous accusations about Tiberius effecting a conspiracy against Gaius. Several centurions who had previously served with Tiberius were said to have returned to camp after meeting their former master and apparently circulated mysterious messages with incitements to treason. Augustus, who had heard an account of these suspicions informed Tiberius. Tiberius response was characteristically cynical, in which he replied that a responsible person, of whatever rank, should be detailed to visit Rhodes and there keep an unceasing watch on what he did and what he said. Nevertheless, despite the sarcastic exchange, Drusus was later made aware of the accusations and arranged for the dismissal of Lollius from Gaius’ retinue. Drusus accompanied Gaius to an island of the Euphrates where he observed with considerable approval the conduct of the negotiations with the Parthian King.

It is perhaps a combination of the above incident, but also more importantly the sudden death due to illness of Augustus’ other adopted son Lucius in 2AD, that Tiberius was finally allowed to return to Rome. Augustus at last gave way to the considerable pleading of Livia and Drusus, but his condition was that Tiberius would take no part and renounce all interest in public affairs.

On returning to Rome Tiberius presented his son Nero Claudius Drusus (the future Pannonicus) to public life. He resided in a modest house in the Gardens of Maecenas on the Esquiline Hill, where he adhered strictly to Augustus’ requirements and lived in retirement, attending only to his private affairs and taking no part in public life. His fortunes would change in time, but would never reach the heights of his earlier career.

In 4AD Augustus suffered a further blow to his succession plans. Gaius Caesar, his eldest adopted son succumbed to injuries sustained in battle and died. He had been wounded fatally during a campaign in Artagira, Armenia and although relocated to Limyra in Lycia for rehabilitation he was unable to recover and died. He was 24.

The death of Gaius precipitated a crisis in the Imperial household. Already rocked by the sudden death of Lucius some two years earlier, Gaius’ death was a considerable blow as he had shown such promise and capacity for greatness at an early age. His marriage to Livilla had not produced any children and consequently there was little alternative but for Augustus to consider one of his stepsons.

http://www.vroma.org/images/mcmanus_images/augustanprince2.jpg
A bust believed to be of Gaius Caesar, adopted son of Augustus

As a result of this event and after the lengthy consideration of Augustus, he adopted his stepson Drusus and his last remaining grandson Postumus Agrippa. Although Tiberius had earlier been shown greater favour Augustus was unwilling to forgive him for his early retirement, and considered him unworthy for Empire. Furthermore it was well known that Augustus held Drusus in such high esteem as to have referred to him several times publicly as a ‘True Roman’, whereas he had never held such regard for Tiberius – even when his star was in ascendance.

Despite the succession having been shored up considerably, there were a number of concerns. Drusus had on many occasions informed his friends that he would, if given the chance, restore the republic. He was also known to have authored a letter to his brother Tiberius, then at the height of career, to jointly persuade Augustus to surrender power to the Senate. Whatever the republican sentiments of Drusus may have been, and they were well known to Augustus, it is clear they caused no lasting harm between the two men. It is possible that Augustus admired him even more for the conviction of his principles. However, most historians agree that the stories of an aging Augustus regretting his usurpation of the Senate and expressing regret at his dictatorship are false and the product of post Drusus revisionism.

The ascendancy of Drusus was followed immediately thereafter by a major uprising in the province Germania Magna. As has already been described, the pacification of Germania was a long and gradual process. The immediate pacification of Germania to the Elbe river would take many decades to fully realise. Although the provinces of Germania Magna and Boihaemum had nominally been part of Rome since 9 BC, there were many problems in holding the provinces down. In 5 AD several Germanic tribes launched raids across the Elbe river most dangerously the Senoni and Caridi. But also added to this were the Saxones and Virudi. Although Augustus preferred to have Drusus remain in Rome, such was the importance of dealing with this threat that Drusus was once again sent to the frontier to deal with the problem.

However soon the Empire was rocked by a far more serious and deadly rebellion which would threaten Rome in The Great Illyrian Revolt of 6 AD. This revolt would demand the attention of Augustus and compel him to take drastic action including the compulsory purchase and emancipation of slaves to constitute an army – a move not having been undertaken by Rome for over two centuries since the Battle of Cannae in the Second Punic War.

---------
[1] A slightly edited quotation for TTL.

[Jonathan Edelstein]

So things are playing out more or less as OTL on the macro scale, but Tiberius' hissy fit has more permanent consequences (dangerous to pull that sort of stunt if there's a spare), and it looks like Drusus rather than Tiberius will be the one pulled away from Germany to handle the Illyrians. On the other hand, if Tiberius' son gets the title "Pannonicus," he'll probably also be a hero of that war despite his young age. Looks like some interesting things are about to happen.

[FDW]

Interesting Roman TL here, consider me subscribed…

[euromellows]

So things are playing out more or less as OTL on the macro scale, but Tiberius' hissy fit has more permanent consequences (dangerous to pull that sort of stunt if there's a spare), and it looks like Drusus rather than Tiberius will be the one pulled away from Germany to handle the Illyrians. On the other hand, if Tiberius' son gets the title "Pannonicus," he'll probably also be a hero of that war despite his young age. Looks like some interesting things are about to happen.

Indeed. Tiberius' hissy fit was dangerous enough in OTL, particularly when Gaius and Lucius still lived. An incident is described by Suetonious in which at a dinner party of Gaius' a guest loudly proclaimed he would sail to Rhodes and fetch the head of 'the exile' if Gaius would but wish it.

Re the Illyrian war, I had something else planned. Remember that in TTL Germania and Bohemia have been temporarily subdued so the dynamics of the Germanic revolt are different from OTL and more widespread and dangerous.

[TaylorS]

Great TL, keep it going! I like the POD.

[Basileus Giorgios]

Really good TL, I like this a lot, thus far. :)
__________________________________________________ ______________
My feelings on a Roman Germany have been set out at great length, and I don't intend on boring everyone by repeating them here. Suffice it to say that, while I think your accounts of the initial wars in Germany are perfectly plausible, I simply can't see the Romans wanting to stay in the region for long- much like Ireland or the Atlas Mountains it has essentially nothing to attract a lasting Roman settlement. There's very little semblance even of a rudimentary elite to begin the process of Romanisation with.

Plus, the idea of a shorter frontier is a bit of a red herring. The Rhine frontier is attractive because it can easily be supplied (via the Moselle) from the central Mediterranean and thus the wheat fields of North Africa and Sicily. The Elbe doesn't have this very large advantage.

Just something to bear in mind for the future. As I say, I think everything that's happened thus far is entirely plausible, but I think you'll be pushing it to have a serious, lasting Roman settlement of the area in this period.

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Augustus’ Empire)

“What had been happening in Germany during this period is as follows. The Romans had a hold on parts of it, not whole regions, but merely those areas which happened to have been subdued, so that this fact has not received historical notice. Meanwhile bodies of troops were in the habit of wintering there, and cities were being founded; the barbarians were gradually re-shaping their habits in conformity with the Roman pattern, were becoming accustomed to hold markets and were meeting in peaceful assemblies. But they had not forgotten their ancestral customs, their native manners, their independent way of life, nor the power they had enjoyed through their strength in arms. So long as they were unlearning their customs little by little, by indirect means, so to speak, and were under careful surveillance, they did not object to the change in their manner of life, and were unconsciously altering their disposition.” -Dio Cassius. The Roman History 56.

http://www.socialhistoryofart.com/photos/Classical-Roman-Sarco/RomansDefeatBarbariansPalAltempsOblique2%20web.jpg

Great Illyrian Revolt

The Great Illyrian Revolt of 6 AD had its roots in the Germanic Rebellion of 5 AD, but also most probably in the general treatment and subjugation of its population since the Roman Empire had crushed the Breuci and Dalmatae tribes in 12 BC and incorporated the inhabitants into the new province of Illyricum. Like most subjugated provinces, Roman rule was at times relatively peaceful and at other times harsh. In the summer of 6 AD the inhabitants considered themselves to be subjected to a period of such harshness so as to illicit a violent response.

The Germanic Rebellion of 5 AD placed a considerable strain on the Roman state that the future Emperor Drusus, then in command of Germania, felt himself unable to effectively subdue without additional reinforcements from Rome. The Germanic Rebellion involved not only the theoretical subjects of Rome, but also those tribes across the Elbe which had not yet had occasion to raise their arms against the Empire. Drusus requested of Augustus a further four legions to fully subdue the Germanic incursions from across the Elbe and suppress their violent tendencies against the majesty of Rome. For such an undertaking Augustus was content to acquiesce to his request, although this was not without reservations as to the profitability of further Germanic conquests. Germania had proven to be a difficult territory to administer, but more importantly it was wholly unprofitable in its reluctant submission to Rome. However despite these reservations Augustus ultimately directed that such a force be raised and placed at the disposal of his heir.

For the provision of this army Augustus placed it under the direction of Publius Quinctilius Varus, a patrician of consular rank and husband to the grand-niece of Augustus. The choice would prove to be a poor one. Already Varus was well known for his harsh rule during his governorship of Syria, in which he was reportedly excessively cruel to the Jews of Jerusalem following a revolt in 4 BC. However it was his general military incompetence which would lead him to gain everlasting infamy in the Roman pantheon.

Varus had earlier been in command of four legions when governor of Syria, although heavy handed with the inhabitants of that region, he had not displayed any specific incompetence when dealing with military matters. Consequently it would seem that his new assignment would not be too onerous, and as he would be primarily under the direction of Drusus, his decidedly inferior military skills would be somewhat moderated by the talents of that remarkable general.

However such an eventuality did not occur. During the early principate period, auxiliary regiments raised in frontier provinces were stationed in or close to their home province. This policy was very risky, for there was potential for an auxiliary regiment to join with their own tribe if said tribe rebelled against Rome. The loss would be two fold for Rome - not only would they be deprived of a cohort of troops, but the enemy would gain the experience and expertise of Roman arms. It is in this context that the tribes of Illyricum, an important source for the auxilia, revolted.

When assembling the necessary auxiliary cohorts to augment the legions under Varus, the Illyrian tribesmen gathered for such a task revolted - First under Bato of the Daesitiate, but joined soon after by the Breuci. The Daesitiate defeated a Roman force dispatched to disperse them, but when they joined with the Breuci were defeated at the Battle of Sirmium by a second Roman force from Moesia under Caecina Severus. The defeat was only temporary, but it had inflicted such casualties on Severus’ troops that he was unable to pursue. This setback for the Romans was regrettable, for soon the Daesitiate and Breuci had occasion to join with other tribes of Illyria and the isolated revolts soon threatened to spread throughout all of Dalmatia.

Augustus ordered Varus to break off his relief to Drusus and move his army to Illyricum. It is understood he also gave serious consideration to recalling Drusus from Germania, but the danger in Germania was also severe. The Caridi under King Adalhard had crossed the Elbe and were ravaging the province of Bohemia. His positioning was of great concern to Augustus, for he was well placed to intervene in the Illyrian Revolt and consequently exacerbate that crisis. Furthermore other tribes of Germania, presently under control, were precariously placed to add their own struggles to Adalhard and threaten the entire north provinces if they so desired. Removing Drusus could be disastrous to these efforts, and consequently the decision was made to retain his presence for the moment.

Varus sent his legates Lucius Nonius Asprenas and Lucius Arruntius ahead of his main troops in an attempt to head off the danger promptly. The legates were competent commanders who handled their duties admirably, but were nonetheless unable to control the crisis. Varus himself proved a poor general, and would often intervene in the decisions of his subordinates to the great frustration of his commanders. This flaw would ultimately prove disastrous when Varus, supremely overconfident and against the explicit advice of his generals, allowed himself to be trapped by the enemy near the river Kupa. Varus and the entirety of the Legions XXI Rapax and XVI Gallica were slaughtered to a man. The loss was a total military disaster and was only mitigated by the actions of Lucius Asprenas in preventing the loss of further legions. However the damage was done and the loss of the legions as well as that of the legionary eagles provoked a crisis in the capital. The Battle of Kupa River has since become an infamous example of ill preparation and rash decisions. A tragedy that was entirely preventable and unnecessary. Varus’ longstanding reputation was prevented further harm by the taking of his own life when he saw the battle lost, and thereby not adding cowardice to incompetence.

http://monkeyfacenews.typepad.com/.a/6a0120a5c94e03970b012875b95c63970c-800wi
The defeat and suicide of Varus

With the defeat of Varus and the spreading of the revolt through the entirety of Dalmatia, panic broke out in Rome. The Illyrian tribes, originally consisting of just the Daesitiate and Breuci, but now also the Amantini, Azali, Colpiani, Daesiates and Pirustaem, had by now secured the Adriatic coast and threatened Italia itself. Augustus raised a second force in Rome where he resorted to the compulsory purchase and emancipation of thousands of slaves in order to amass enough troops. This extraordinary decision, not undertaken since the aftermath of the Battle of Cannae two centuries earlier, demonstrates the great fear that Augustus and very likely all of Rome possessed at the time. Remarkably, Augustus constituted at least 50 auxiliary cohorts composed of Roman citizens. These were men Augustus considered as unsuitable for recruitment into the legions (which consisted entirely of citizens). For the most part these were either convicted criminals or freed slaves of Roman citizens. These units were accorded the title civium Romanorum (“of Roman citizens”) and maintained this distinction after the crisis.

The delegation of this army could potentially prove to be a momentous decision, and Augustus chose carefully. This task, which possessed great honour but also great responsibility, was delegated to none other than Tiberius. Although it is likely that Augustus’ wife Livia had some influence on his decision, primarily the necessities of the situation demanded it. Drusus could not be recalled from the frontier, and no other general had the experience and knowledge of the region as well as Tiberius. Furthermore it was Tiberius who had, in 12 BC, originally pacified the tribes of Illyria. Such was the context in which Augustus set aside his personal dislike and Tiberius found himself rehabilitated to public life. He was summoned to the Imperial Palace where he was presented with his commission and given a private audience with Augustus. He wasted no time in departing to the front, taking with him his son Drusus and a retinue of personal staff.

Tiberius conducted the Illyrian campaign for three years at the head of thirteen regular legions and a correspondingly large force of auxiliaries. He carried out his task with diligence and a great degree of caution. It is possible he was aware this was his last great chance for honours, but more likely he was influenced by the great military disaster at Kupa. His conduct in this war is described by Suetonius:

“Tiberius arrived in Illyria and, finding that the disaster there had been due to Varus’ rashness and neglect of precautions against surprise, refrained from taking any strategic decisions without the assent of his general staff. This was a notable departure from habit; hitherto he had always complete confidence in his own judgement, but he was now relying on a large military council.” -Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars. Tiberius. 18. [1]

His precautions proved fruitful. For although supplies were short and conditions arduous, Tiberius never allowed the enemy forces to assume the offensive. After a period of three years the stubbornness of Tiberius reduced the whole of Illyricum to complete submission. This feat, for which the Roman people were grateful, inspired the Senate to vote him a triumph and award him the cognomen Pannonicus. [2] Tiberius postponed his triumph because of the public mourning of Varus and the continuing campaign of his brother Drusus in Germania. However, he did accept the cognomen Pannonicus but in this he followed his brother’s precedence by accepting it only on behalf of his son.

Meanwhile the heir Drusus had also won great honours for Rome during his own campaign further north. Although it is not strictly true that he spent the entirety of his four year campaign in the field, his various recalls to Rome were of such a brief nature that he could be said to have literally lived in camp almost the whole time. Drusus spent the majority of his campaign containing the various Germanic tribes which rebelled against Roman rule. The most dangerous of these were those beyond the Elbe who were not strictly within the Roman realm, but who feared Roman expansion so much they felt a pre-emptive strike would prevent such a fate.

We have already seen how the Caridic King Adalhard threatened to join his forces to those of Illyria and thus exacerbate both the Germanic Rebellions and the Great Illyrian Revolt. Such an occurrence would have been devastating to Rome and potentially forced a Roman withdrawal into Italia – a disastrous setback for Roman policy. Drusus' efforts, along with his brother's further south, prevented this from occurring. Drusus was ultimately denied the extra legions he requested to fully destroy the Germanic tribes beyond the Elbe. This was not by choice, but as we have already seen the circumstances of events.

Despite not possessing the strength he desired, Drusus nonetheless used his considerable talents to contain the rebellion. After a period of two years he was able to force the Caridi to retreat back across the Elbe, but was unable to pursue them and complete the victory. He had several engagements with the Senones, Saxones and Virudi, and was fortunate to prevent their coordination under a confederation. For this he pursued both a military and diplomatic strategy, at one point even convincing the Virudi to switch sides, albeit only temporarily.

For those tribes within the Roman borders itself Drusus proved remarkably successful. His diplomatic skills kept the tribes mostly loyal, and he was careful to rescind the collecting of taxes and recruitment of auxilia during the crisis from those tribes whose loyalty was suspect. His dealings with the chiefs were also respectful but firm. Whilst he was capable of kindness he was also ruthless in dealing with rebellion. The failed Cherusci chieftain Arminius, at one time a hostage of Rome, was executed promptly after attempting unsuccessfully to foment a rebellion amongst his people. Drusus shored up the chief Segestas in his place, and raised the Cherusci to a higher status amongst the province to ensure their obedience. [3]

Finally, when the Illyrian Revolt was dealt with there remained the possibility of those legions being sent north to Germania to finish the job. Although it was an outcome that Drusus had desired, the great exhaustion of their experience, and also of his own, convinced him to not pursue it. He returned to Rome in 9 AD and celebrated a joint triumph with his brother Tiberius, taking with him his son Germanicus and other generals who had campaigned with him. Soon afterwards the consuls introduced a measure which gave Drusus joint control of the provinces with Augustus and the task of assisting him to carry out the next five-year census.

The honour and stability brought to Rome was immense, but it was soon to be overshadowed by another crisis – that of Augustus and his declining health.

-----

[1] A slight changing of OTL quotation from Suetonius, except in this case Illyria has been changed in place of Germania.
[2] In OTL the Senate proposed to award Tiberius either Pannonicus, Invictus or Pius, but Augustus vetoed these on the grounds that Tiberius would be adequately awarded when he [Augustus] died. Obviously in TTL Tiberius is not destined to succeed Augustus and consequently the impediment does not remain.
[3] In OTL there was great division amongst the Cherusci of pro-Roman disposition and anti-Roman. This existed even with the cruelties and harshness of Varus’ administration. With the more benign administration of Drusus in TTL, there would be significantly less anti-Roman feeling and Arminius’ efforts would be fruitless.

[TaylorS]

So Varus still has a major F-up! :D

[Jonathan Edelstein]

So Varus will always be Varus, and Tiberius has redeemed himself at least partially. Nice update - and I think my prediction of a duumvirate is becoming more and more likely.

[FDW]

Nice update.

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Augustus’ Empire)

“He [Caesar] learned that Alexander, having completed nearly all his conquests by the time he was thirty-two years old, was at an utter loss to know what he should do during the rest of his life, whereat Augustus expressed his surprise that Alexander did not regard it as a greater task to set in order the empire which he had won than to win it.” –Plutarch. Moralia Apophthegmata Romana (III.235)

http://oi48.tinypic.com/w2zjl.jpg

The passing of Augustus and the end of the Interauctoritas

The ailment and passing of Augustus was predicted by a number of evident signs of which his contemporaries treated seriously. Firstly an incident was recorded where Augustus and Drusus, while closing a census period with a purificatory ceremony in the Campus Martius, an eagle circled around him several times and then flew to the nearby temple, landing on the first ‘A’ of Agrippa’s name. Augustus had seen this and at about the same time lightning melted the initial letter of his last name on the inscription below one of his statues. This, we are informed, was interpreted to mean that he would live only another hundred days, which the letter ‘C’ signifies. Perhaps more extraordinary, but the remaining letters ‘AESAR’ is the Etruscan for ‘god’, and this was taken to mean that he would be enrolled among the gods.

A second incident, albeit recalled only enthusiastically after his passing, was when sending Drusus off to Illyria and planning to accompany him as far as Beneventum, he got held up by a long list of court cases and cried, “I will stay here no longer, whoever tries to detain me!” These words were subsequently recalled as prophetic.

Augustus was, like many of his contemporaries, a superstitious man. For example he considered it bad luck to thrust his right foot into the left shoe as he got out of bed, or to start a journey on the day after a market day. On the other hand it was good luck for him to start a long journey or voyage during a drizzle of rain. It is therefore possible that he too foresaw his own passing through these same incidents. In any event he did not take any special precautions or make significant changes to his habits, rather, he continued his public duties and accompanied Drusus to Beneventum to see him off to Illyria. Augustus was struck by an illness shortly after this parting and, on his homeward journey, took to his bed at Nola. Drusus was recalled from his journey by Augustus, whom he found in his last illness.

A slow decline into illness?

A number of stories abounded about Augustus in his last days; their status so enduring that it would be amiss not to relate them here. First there was that of Augustus, some thirty days before his death, where he was found huddled at the feet of Brutus’ statue [1] sobbing profusely. When the praetorian guards tried to gently remove him he continued to say over and over again, “What have I done to the Republic?” There were other stories too, like his reaction upon hearing of Varus’ defeat at Kupa. It was said that he took the disaster so deeply to heart that he left his hair and beard untrimmed for months; he would beat his head on a door, shouting “Quinctilius Varus, give me back my legions!”

Most historians have dismissed the stories as apocryphal and the product of fancy. It is unlikely that Augustus, first and foremost a consummate politician, would ever have done such things. However the enduring popularity of such stories, coupled with the immortal theatrical adaptions of contemporary actors, has ensured that the stories will likely continue to endure well into the future. [2]

When Drusus arrived at Augustus’ bedside he spent an entire day with him in private. Drusus’ daughter Livilla was also quite sick at this time in Rome, and Augustus continued to ask for news of her condition. At the last he enquired whether rumours of his illness were causing any popular disturbance. He called for a mirror, and had his hair combed and his lower jaw, which had fallen from weakness, propped up. He summoned a group of friends and asked, “Have I played my part in the farce of life creditably enough?” His last moments are recorded thus:

“Finally he kissed his wife with ‘Goodbye, Livia; remember our marriage, and died almost at once. He must have longed for such an easy exit, for whenever he had heard of anyone having passed away quickly and painlessly he used to pray, ‘May Heaven grant the same euthanasia to me and mine!’ The only sign that his wits were wandering, just before he died, was his sudden cry of terror ‘Forty young men are carrying me off!’ But even this may be read as a prophecy rather than a delusion, because forty praetorians were to form the guard of honour that conveyed him to his lying-in-state.” –Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars. Divus Augustus. 99

Augustus died in the same room as his father Octavius, he was just thirty-five days short of his seventy-sixth year. Decurions and other local officials bore the body in stages from Nola to Bovillae. From Bovillae, a party of equites carried it to the vestibule of his house at Rome.

The senators vied with one another in proposing posthumous honours for Augustus. Amongst some of the excessive motions were that the period between his birth and death should be officially entered in the calendar as the ‘Augustan Age’, or that the name August should be transferred to September, because Augustus had been born in September but had died in the month now called August. Such proposals were kept in check, and he was given three funeral eulogies. Firstly, by his heir and adopted son Drusus before the Temple of Divus Julius, but also with the reigning consuls of that year Sextus Pompeius and Sextus Appuleius. Afterwards a party of senators carried the body and took it to a pyre on the Campus Martius, where it was burned. Drusus’ decision to share the honour of the eulogy with the reigning consuls was significant in that it gave a glimpse of the kind of approach he would later take when Emperor.

Augustus’ will, kept in three parts and whose safekeeping he had entrusted to the Vestal Virgins, was opened and read in the Senate. It proved that he had appointed Drusus and Livia as heirs in the first degree, with Drusus taking two-thirds of his estate and Livia one-third, and both adopting his name. As heir in the second degree he named Drusus’ son Germanicus, taking one-third of the estate. Tiberius’ son, also Drusus but now called Pannonicus, was treated as an heir in the third degree and given the remainder of the estate.

Augustus also left a legacy of 40 million sesterces to the people of Rome, 3.5 million to the tribes, 1,000 to every praetorian guard, 500 to every member of the urban cohorts and 300 to every legionary soldier. These payments were made at once as he had always kept aside enough funds for this purpose. He left behind instructions for his own funeral, a list of his accomplishments which he wished to be engraved at his personal Mausoleum, and finally an account book of the whole empire. This latest book contained comprehensive statements of how many troops were stationed and in what places, what public funds were held in the state treasury, and what revenues were due for collection. He also supplied the names of secretaries and freedmen who could furnish further details on demand.

There were two other instructions which accompanied his will, although they primarily related to his family arrangements. In the first instance he gave orders that if anything should happen to his daughter Julia or his granddaughter (also Julia) their bodies must be excluded from his Mausoleum. In the second instance however, it has been difficult for historians to objectively analyse whether the instructions originated from him, or from another source.

As we have seen Drusus was the clear successor to Augustus, both in life but also posthumously as confirmed in his will. The only other possible successor was Postumus Agrippa, the last son of Agrippa and Julia. When Augustus’ adopted sons Gaius and Lucius had died, Augustus had adopted both Drusus and Postumus as his heirs. The former was a worthy successor, the latter a major disappointment.

There are few surviving contemporary accounts of Postumus. Those that do survive are difficult to objectively analyse since they come after the ascension of Drusus and may be biased. However, what is known is that Postumus developed an unsavoury reputation and that Augustus was bitterly disappointed in him. Certainly there are no records of his attaining public office, a necessary prerequisite to succeed the great Augustus, nor had he any military experience at all. More and more his character contrasted sharply with that of the popular and exceedingly competent Drusus.

There is no single incident at which historians can point to which lead to Postumus’ disinheritance and exile to Surrentum. Rather, it appears to be a series of incidents which, over time, lead to a marked deterioration in his relationship with Augustus. Augustus was observed to have given Postumus many chances as recorded thus:

“Because Agrippa Postumus’ conduct, so far from improving, grew daily more irresponsible, he was transferred to an island and held there under military surveillance; Augustus then asked the Senate to pass a decree making Postumus’ banishment permanent.”-Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars. Divus Augustus. 65

It is in this context that, on the passing of Augustus, Postumus Agrippa was murdered by the military tribune appointed as his guard. The tribune reported to Drusus that he had done his duty, and indicated that he had received a written order to that effect. Drusus, we understand, was horrified and responded that the tribune would need to account for his actions to the Senate for he had given no such order. The tribune was later acquitted by the Senate for his actions, although the origins of the order remain a mystery to this day. While it is likely that Augustus gave the order himself, there were a number of rumours which indicated Livia gave the order on behalf of Augustus. What is known is that Drusus himself was unaware of the orders, and that he ordered the trial be taken with the utmost seriousness. The Senate found the tribune guilty of nothing other than following orders, and the matter was put to rest. It is likely they were satisfied that the occasion of a rival to the Emperor was eliminated, and consequently the chance of a civil war averted. The death of Postumus seems to have solicited no popular reaction within the Empire, a testament to the popularity of Drusus.

http://oi48.tinypic.com/kbdhtg.jpg
The Empire at the passing of Augustus (14 A.D.) [3]

The passing of Augustus represents the end of an era. He often boasted that he found Rome made of brick, and left it with marble. While this is in the context of the city Rome, it could easily be equated to that of the Empire as well. His reign had seen the expansion of the Empire from Germania to Egypt, but also the consolidation of other provinces such as Hispania and Illyria which he fully pacified. He presided over an era of great change, and although the concentration of such power in one man did not long outlive him, he is generally credited with bringing stability back to the Empire after the turbulent years of the Late Republic. Historians have generally referred to his long reign as the ‘Interauctoritas’, for it represents a unique period in Roman history between the Old Republic and those of the reforms later championed by Drusus, which saw a partial restoration to republicanism. As for the legacy of Augustus himself, few characters in the history of Rome can boast such an extraordinary career and his subsequent deification amongst the Gods has ensured his enduring popularity amongst the Roman pantheon.

-------------

[1] Not the Marcus Junius Brutus associated with Julius Caesar’s death, but Lucius Junius Brutus the founder of the Roman Republic.
[2] No doubt TTL would have an equivalent of Brian Blessed's immortal performance of Augustus too.
[3] You will note the borders of the Empire are, with the exception of Germania and Bohemia (Boihaemum), the same as OTL.

[TaylorS]

ALL HAIL DRUSUS!!! :)

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Drusus' Reforms)

“ For who-when he saw Drusus, after the death of Augustus, assuming the sovereignty of the whole world in a condition free from all sedition, and regulated by and obedient to admirable laws, and adapted to unanimity and harmony in all its parts, east and west, south and north; the barbarian nations being in harmony with the Greeks, and the Greeks with the barbarians, and the soldiers with the body of private citizens, and the citizens with the military; so that they all partook of and enjoyed one common universal peace-could fail to marvel at and be amazed at his extraordinary and unspeakable good fortune that all the world, from the rising to the setting sun, all the land in short on this side of the Ocean and beyond the Ocean, at which all the Roman people and all Italy rejoiced, and even all the Asiatic and European nations.” –Philo of Alexandria. On the embassy to Drusus. II.8 [1]

http://www.laits.utexas.edu/moore/sites/laits.utexas.edu.moore/files/images/0004010021_1024.preview.jpg

The Ascension of Drusus – His popular public career to date – His homage to Augustus and the foreshadowing of great reforms.

The ascension of Drusus in 14 A.D. marks the end of the ‘Interauctoritas’ of Augustus’ reign. More importantly then that though, it marks the beginning of a new era in Roman history. We have already seen the indications of Drusus’ republican sentiments, but it would be useful to us, and eminently more sensible, if we begin firstly with a summary of his life up until his ascension.

Drusus was born Decimus Claudius Drusus on 6 April 38 BC to the Roman Empress Livia Drusilla, roughly three months after her marriage to Augustus. Some people suspected that Augustus, and not her ex-husband, was the father. This provoked the following epigram:

“How fortunate those parents for whom, Their child is only three months in the womb!” –Suetonius. Divus Claudius. 1 [2]

Despite these rumours, which could give occasion to great ambitions, Augustus never acknowledged Drusus as his natural son. Nor, in fact, did Drusus, who maintained that his natural father was Tiberius Claudius Nero (hereafter referred to as Tiberius the Elder). At some stage, it is not clear when, but Drusus’ praenomen was changed to Nero. The reasons are not entirely clear, but it has since been speculated that “Nero” was a traditional cognomen of the Claudius family, whereas “Drusus” originally belonged to the Livius dynasty – thus it is speculated that, although there may be doubts as to his paternity, at least the world knew who his mother was.

Drusus was raised in his natural father’s house along with his brother Tiberius. Drusus and Tiberius developed a close relationship during this time which would last the rest of their lives. Tiberius the Elder died in 33 BC and Drusus and his brother were sent to Livia to be raised by herself and Augustus.

Although their upbringing with Tiberius the Elder had been brief, it is clear they left a lasting impression on the two children, in particular Drusus. Their father had been a republican at heart and, although he had served previously under Caesar to great effect, he was known to have suggested the conspirators against Caesar should be rewarded for saving the republic. During the later civil war with Marc Antony and Octavian he initially sided with Marc Antony. Fortunately he was able to extricate himself from this situation in 40 BC where he returned to Rome with his then wife Livia and son Tiberius. After his divorce from Livia in 38 BC he lead a quiet life, devoid of any public office. He raised his sons in the traditional patrician method, providing them a well-rounded education. It is presumed he imparted to his sons the virtues of the republic, for it was a sentiment the two would carry with them the rest of their lives.

Drusus’ public career officially began in 19 BC, where he was granted the ability to hold all public offices five years before the minimum age. In 16 BC when his brother Tiberius left Italy during his term as praetor, Drusus legislated in his place where he was noted for his intelligence and amiable manner. It was also this year that he married Antonia Minor, the daughter of Marc Antony and Augustus’ sister Octavia Minor. He gained a reputation of being completely faithful to her, and unlike many arranged marriages of the time theirs proved to be very happy.

Their first child Tiberius Claudius Nero (later simply Germanicus) was born in 15 BC, the same year in which Drusus held the post of quaestor fighting against Raetian bandits in the Alps. Drusus distinguished himself in this action, but was unable to completely smash them without reinforcements from his brother. Together the brothers easily defeated the Alpine tribes and gained an enduring reputation as a force to be reckoned with.

Drusus’ second child, a daughter named Livia Julia (later simply Livilla), was born in 13 BC. In the same year he was sent to govern Gaul to quell several riots which had been caused by the actions of the previous governor. During his time there a number of German tribes attacked the Roman settlements in the region and Drusus retaliated with his legions and beat them back across the Rhine. He penetrated deep into German territory, travelling along the North Sea coast and placing a yearly tribute on the formidable Frisii tribe. For his actions there he was recalled to Rome where he was made praetor urbanus in 11 BC. This was a distinct honour, for it was the most senior magistrate of Praetor rank and he was only 27 years old.

Despite the great honour Drusus was never one for political intrigue, far preferring his time as a soldier. He returned to the German frontier where, we have already seen, he won many victories against the tribes across the Rhine. In 10 BC his third child was born, Tiberius Claudius Drusus (later simply Claudius). His family had accompanied him to Gaul and Drusus was present for the birth.

Drusus continued his campaigns against the Germans and at one point suffered a serious injury from falling from his horse. The injury forced him to delay his action against the enemy, but after recovering sufficiently he continued to extract victories in the region. In 6 BC Drusus was voted the cognomen ‘Germanicus’ for his victories against the Germanic tribes and the pacification of that land. Drusus never used the name himself, rather, he accepted it on behalf of his first born who would thereafter be popularly known as Germanicus.

In 1 BC Drusus consented to the marriage of his daughter Livilla to Augustus’ designated successor Gaius. That same year he accompanied his step-son to the frontier with Parthia and met with the Parthian King Phraates IV in which a treaty highly favourable to Rome was negotiated. The treaty was important, for in many ways it avenged the Roman loss at Carrhae some fifty years earlier. A number of prisoners were returned to Rome, but most importantly the legionary eagles were restored. Although the honour chiefly went to Gaius for this treaty, Drusus’ involvement was understood to be significant.

We have already seen how the death of Gaius Caesar in 4 AD lead to the adoption of Drusus and his becoming the second most powerful man in Rome. What Drusus made of these events is difficult to ascertain. Certainly in public he never shirked his duty, and indeed at times appeared to embrace his role. But his private opinion may have been somewhat different. Drusus’ republican sentiments had never left him. During the early phase of his career he had openly announced to his friends that, as soon as he came to power, he would restore the republic. [3] Such public sentiments could be dangerous, but to Augustus he held a deep affection for his step-son that they did not cause lasting harm. To be sure, it is likely Augustus did at some point caution Drusus about his public statements now he was the designated successor. Drusus became cautious in this regard, except in one incident described thus:

“He was seated calmly amongst his friends, listening to the history of Rome. The Greek Scholar Diognetes, having elucidated on the great histories, asked him who the greatest ruler of Rome was. Drusus, expected to answer Augustus, replied simply that Cincinnatus was the greatest of the Romans, adding ‘It is far easier to dismantle that which greater men have cherished and preserved.’ This was taken to be a criticism of Augustus and all present extricated themselves from any knowledge of the event, until well after his [Augustus’] passing.” –Gnaeus Proculus. Leaders of Rome. 4.11[4]

Whether such stories are true is open to debate. Certainly their existence demonstrate his reputation at the time, although the appearance of this particular anecdote did not eventuate until after Drusus’ own passing. In any event it is not hard to imagine Drusus idolising Cincinnatus as the great saviour of Rome who, after fulfilling his duty to the state, gracefully laid down his power and retired to his farm.

Shortly after his adoption Drusus was forced to campaign in Germania during the Great Illyrian Revolt. His preference was, we have seen, to assemble a large force and cross the Elbe to subdue the Germanic tribes there in furious rebellion. However, such an eventuality did not occur due to the events in Illyria. After 3 years of campaigning Drusus contented himself with having contained the province. He returned to Rome where he shared a triumph with his brother Tiberius, who had earnt the cognomen ‘Pannonicus’ for his victories in that war. Drusus was pleased with Tiberius’ rehabilitation, and brought his brother closer into his confidence.

In the last years of Augustus’ life Drusus began to share power with him. In the final year, he undertook to conduct the census on Augustus’ behalf. Whilst in the conduct of these duties, and on route to Illyria, he was suddenly recalled where he found Augustus in the last stages of illness. He spent an entire day with him in private by his bedside, tending to his requests and assuring him of his devotion. Drusus may have at times been critical of the level of power invested in Augustus, but we can be sure from the numerous historical accounts he genuinely admired his step-father. The feelings were reciprocated, for it was said Augustus’ passing was made easier knowing he left his legacy to a worthy heir.

Drusus spoke eloquently at Augustus’ funeral, eulogising his predecessor as a hero of Rome and a man of incredible vision. He also chose to share the platform with the reigning Consuls of that year, a distinguished honour which would set the tone of his rule.

The choice of Drusus as successor proved to be popular. Already his reputation amongst the people was established as a great hero of Rome. His deeds, though considerable on their own, were insignificant next to his famous personality. Drusus had charisma which his brother, no matter how worthy his own achievements, could never compete with. The ordinary citizen would cheer his name through the crowd, and great optimism surged through the city and even the provinces throughout the early days of his reign. He was also popular with the senatorial classes, particularly the optimates, for he represented the very image of a traditional Roman – possessing a stable family with children, fulfilling public service to the state and observant in his duty (pietas) to the Gods. He also represented the best hope for some kind of restoration of their ancient privileges.

Drusus convened the Senate a full month after Augustus’ passing, as was the customary mourning period. Speaking before the Senate Drusus paid further homage to Augustus as the man who saved Rome during the turbulent years of the Late Republic. Although he openly acknowledged the terrible damage wrought to republicanism during the civil war, he painted Augustus as a necessary force that stabilised the traditions of the Roman Senate and its people. However an important distinction would be made. Augustus’ stabilising influence was once necessary, but those crisis times were over and Drusus indicated he would move to restore the republic not only in name but in fact. Broadly his intention was that the auctoritas and potestas (authority and power) of the Senate would be restored, but he acknowledged that the old structures were insufficient to assure this. Instead he proposed a number of important reforms which, it was hoped, would provide for a successful transition. At the cornerstone of this strategy was a proposal that Roman law and, in particular that relating to its government, would be reorganised into a binding single code. In short, he proposed the promulgation of a new legally binding Duodecim Tabulae (Law of the Twelve Tables), now more popularly known as the Roman Constitution. The Constitution wouldn't be the only major reform he would undertake, but arguably it was the most important. It was an undertaking that would see a massive reorganisation of Rome, and ensure Drusus' everlasting legacy as a great reformer.

-------------
[1] An edited version of an OTL quote from this author describing the first eight months of Caligula’s reign. The great aspirations to which many had on Caligula’s ascension is hard to reconcile with the popular image we now have of an insane Emperor, but there it is all the same.
[2] The verse is in Greek, and is thought to come from a now-lost comedy of the fourth century B.C.
[3] Suetonius. Divus Claudius. 1
[4] An original historian from TTL

[TaylorS]

I wanna see this constitution! :D

[Jonathan Edelstein]

A formal constitution? Sulla tried that, and it lasted only until the ruling coalition of the moment decided to dismantle it. If Drusus wants to do better - and he'll have the Sullan reforms as a negative example - he'll have to do something to entrench them, which probably means retaining some degree of imperial authority.

It will be interesting to see which of Augustus' powers and titles he agrees to take, and how much behind-the-scenes influence he'll exercise in the theoretically-independent Senate. That, and what happens to Tiberius.

[Shogun]

This is an awesome timeline -please don't let it die.

[euromellows]

Thanks for the posts. Really appreciate the interest. I've slightly edited the last post to fix up some typos and pick up on Jonathan Edelstein's point.

TaylorS wrote: I wanna see this constitution

Next update I promise. Actually the next update won't really feature anything but the proposed reforms. The update after that will deal with the chief events following the constitution.

Jonathan Edelstein wrote: A formal constitution? Sulla tried that, and it lasted only until the ruling coalition of the moment decided to dismantle it. If Drusus wants to do better - and he'll have the Sullan reforms as a negative example - he'll have to do something to entrench them, which probably means retaining some degree of imperial authority.

As usual thanks for your insightful post. Basically you're right. Sulla's attempts to reform the constitution does provide such an example to Drusus, and arguably a precedent. The elephant in the room for Sulla was the army and its role in the State. Ironically thanks in part to Augustus' long dictatorial reign, and his many reforms, it has created a stable situation for far reaching reform to be undertaken. I should stress that the constitution isn't the only reform Drusus will be enacting, but it is arguably the most important. I have amended the last paragraph to make this a bit clearer. The next chapter will deal primarily with the proposed constitution, but also touch briefly on Drusus' own transformation from youthful idealist to matured pragmatist.

Jonathan Edelstein wrote: It will be interesting to see which of Augustus' powers and titles he agrees to take, and how much behind-the-scenes influence he'll exercise in the theoretically-independent Senate. That, and what happens to Tiberius.

You've hit the nail on the head. I won't reveal all just yet, but the stability of such reforms do require some level of enlarged authority. It certainly won't be as blatant as Augustus, and it won't be anything like Tiberius' confected reluctance either.

Shogun wrote: This is an awesome timeline -please don't let it die.

Thanks for your comment. I certainly hope it doesn't die. I admit one of my biggest problems is developing a particular interest in a historical era (almost to the point of obsession), and then at some point moving on to a different era that takes my fancy. I earlier worked on a WW2 Timeline which I quite enjoyed but never finished. I do intend to go back to it one day, but at the moment I'm very much enjoying this - particularly the research that has gone along with it.

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Sulla's attempts to reform the constitution does provide such an example to Drusus, and arguably a precedent. The elephant in the room for Sulla was the army and its role in the State. Ironically thanks in part to Augustus' long dictatorial reign, and his many reforms, it has created a stable situation for far reaching reform to be undertaken.

The Augustan reforms were constitutional reforms as well - Augustus pretended they weren't (likely for both political and personal reasons) but they effectively ended the republic and replaced it with a monarchy that had some republican features. Drusus is no doubt smart enough to realize this - by the time of Augustus' death, it was obvious for anyone with eyes to see - so he'll have a number of constitutional precedents to choose from. My guess is that the Augustan constitution will actually be his starting point - that his objective will be (a) to keep as many of the stabilizing features of Augustan rule as possible while still restoring some power to the Senate and the popular assemblies; and (b) to formalize the constitutional order rather than continuing the Augustan/Tiberian pretense that nothing had changed.

Speaking of which, I wonder what the popular assemblies' role will be in Drusus' constitution. They did meet during Augustus' reign - there were still elections for many of the the Roman magistracies, although Augustus made sure only the right people could run and (according to Williams (http://chrestomathy.cofc.edu/pv_obj_cache/pv_obj_id_34C8285E3869951DEA5E5DECFD488EDC45AE0500/filename/SWilliams.pdf), pp. 247-48) changed the electoral system so that certain centuries were composed entirely of nobles. Will the Drusan reforms restore the assemblies as a genuine counterweight to the Senate, or will he maintain Augustus' concentration of electoral power in the noble class? What about the tribunate - will he restore the tribunes to something resembling their former role, or will he consider them too much of a destabilizing factor? I could see him going either way - on the one hand, the popular assemblies could be a check against ambitious senators who want to seize absolute power, but on the other hand, they could get out of the "right people's" control and lead to the mob rule that the upper class feared. I'll be interested to see where you go on these issues.

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Actually, the more I read about the Augustan electoral reforms, the more interesting a starting point they appear to be.

Before AD 5, the comitia centuriata was divided into five classes with the rich holding the most power and voting first, but the centuries' votes weren't announced until someone had a majority. The Lex Valeria Cornelia of AD 5 created ten new centuries composed entirely of senators and equites. These centuries would vote first, and their votes would be announced before the others proceeded. This meant that, while the other centuries could still outvote them, they would know who the "great and good" of Rome supported, which would no doubt influence who they chose. And the senators and equites, of course, would know which side their bread was buttered on, so they'd support the candidates that Augustus favored.

Also, Augustus shortened the consular term to six months and doubled the number of praetors and quaestors, which allowed more of the upper class to have the prestige of holding office, but also diluted the power of any single magistrate.

In OTL, according to Brunt (http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/298838?uid=3739832&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21101045900263), the Lex Valeria Cornelia was amended twice during Tiberius' reign, and that the electoral power of the centuries was eventually transferred directly to the Senate. In OTL, this won't happen, or at least won't happen in precisely the same way. But the Augustan system will still be the one that Drusus inherits, and as such, it will be the simplest starting point for further reforms - at that point, the easiest way to restore the republic would be to keep the Principate political system but without the Princeps.

So what will Drusus do? Will he consider the Augustan reforms to be an ideal balance of power - one where the senators are electorally dominant, but where the power of any one of them is diluted in comparison to the super-magistrate that he will probably still be - or will he make adjustments either in the senators' or the commoners' direction? Would he, like Tiberius, make the Senate into an electoral college, or would he conversely restore the late Republican system that favored the middle and "lower upper" classes? Would he mess with the number and terms of the magistrates as Augustus did?

Also, assuming that the popular assemblies continue in existence, would they be solely electoral bodies or would some of their judicial and legislative functions be restored? (Augustus apparently submitted laws to the assemblies on occasion, so at least in theory, those functions might still exist at the time of the Drusan reforms). And if the assemblies retain legislative power, who would have authority to propose laws? I'm guessing that Drusus wouldn't want to restore the republican situation where tribunes could propose laws that would work at cross-purposes or exercise an unlimited veto over the acts of other magistrates. He'd want to limit both the number of people who could propose bills and the number of bodies that could enact them. Maybe he'd make the Senate the sole legislature, or else allow the public assemblies to legislate only after he, or the Senate collectively, proposes a bill.

Drusus has his work cut out for him restoring a republic that doesn't return to the instability of the Republic - there are many ambitious people who would take a restoration of republican forms as an invitation to just that. Again, it will be interesting to see how he threads that needle.

[euromellows]

Well with the big caveat that Drusus died in 9 BC when he was 29 we can only guess at what he would have done. What we do know of him is that he was patrician, the majority of his career was spent in the army at which he was highly competent, he was very popular with his troops and it appears with almost everybody he met, he had a reputation of complete faithfulness to his wife and also that he was a republican. Now 29 is still quite young and people can (and do) change. Assuming he does become Princeps in 14 A.D. then this 29 year old man is now 52. In all likelihood he would not have the idealistic republican vision of his youth. However if we assume that 29, while still quite young, is advanced enough to have formed the nucleus of someone's personality then I do envisage a form of restoration taking place.

I've tried to be careful in balancing what should be done to ensure the reforms, as to what would have been done. Consequently the result would not be a perfect balance as envisaged by Polybius (ie, between monarchy, democracy and aristocracy). Drusus' patrician background and extensive military experience lead me to believe he would take a more hierarchical view of the republic. To that end I would see him restoring the Senate to the front and centre of politics. After all the leading citizens of Rome are the Senate.

That being said we know that Drusus was very popular with his troops and the citizenry. Consequently he does not fear or distrust the people, as Tiberius did. I believe the assemblies would still have a role to play. From Drusus' point of view this could be to demonstrate his republican credentials, or that it provides more long term stability for the ordinary citizen to have some kind of a political outlet. Now the role of the assemblies would be much diminished from the perspective of the old republic, but from the Augustan point of view they retain some of their functions. For example it would not be possible to present legislation before them (at least without it having been first approved by the senate). There would be no instances of the plebian tribune bypassing the Senate and taking the law straight to the people. However it also won't reduce to the irrelevancy that Tiberius subjected it to, retaining some of its electoral powers.

I won't reveal everything just yet, as much as I'd like to. In many ways this timeline may not be the 'complete' version. So if it eventuates my proposals are too unrealistic (although I do not believe they are) then I may need to revise the timeline into a Mark II.

I'm using my primary source as David Shotter's Rome and Her Empire (http://books.google.com.au/books/about/Rome_and_Her_Empire.html?id=j5mZUb5aj6wC&redir_esc=y) and Augustus Caesar (http://books.google.com.au/books?id=NqjbE5eBGm4C&printsec=references&vq=%22Rome+and+Her+Empire%22&source=gbs_citations_module_r&cad=4). Your sources were quite interesting and I might have a look further at them. You're right in that the Augustan reforms are the starting point from which Drusus will begin. As I said earlier there is a sense of irony but Augustus's long dictatorial reign has actually made it much easier for his predecessor to partially restore the republic, while it is still within living memory (just I would think, Augustus died an old man for those times).

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Given how expanded 'rome' is now, will there be any recognition of that fact?

If all the decisions are made by people from a single city, then a renewed republic might be worse than useless.

At least when everyones part of a centralized empire you are ALL ruled the same, and expansion of citizenship is meaningful, it gives the same rights whether you live in rome or palestine or gaul.

If being a roman citizen means you have to travel to rome to vote, this will be a problem....

[TaylorS]

Given how expanded 'rome' is now, will there be any recognition of that fact?

If all the decisions are made by people from a single city, then a renewed republic might be worse than useless.

At least when everyones part of a centralized empire you are ALL ruled the same, and expansion of citizenship is meaningful, it gives the same rights whether you live in rome or palestine or gaul.

If being a roman citizen means you have to travel to rome to vote, this will be a problem....

During the Principate (Early Empire) the local city governments still had lots of autonomy as long as they stayed loyal and paid their taxes.

[euromellows]

Given how expanded 'rome' is now, will there be any recognition of that fact?

If all the decisions are made by people from a single city, then a renewed republic might be worse than useless.

At least when everyones part of a centralized empire you are ALL ruled the same, and expansion of citizenship is meaningful, it gives the same rights whether you live in rome or palestine or gaul.

If being a roman citizen means you have to travel to rome to vote, this will be a problem....

As good as Drusus is, I just don't see him enacting such reforms. In fact, I don't see any Roman of the period doing it. The Romans tended to think in terms of city-states and I don't think Drusus would be any different. Their idea of 'representation' is much different to our own.

For the average Roman in the provinces (or even non-citizen) they probably won't even notice. At the local level the Decurion structure allowed elites a considerable amount of influence and for them life will go on as normal, regardless of who is in charge at Rome. The provincial pro-consuls/prefects will still be appointed from Rome and have de facto dictatorship powers as per our own timeline. Theoretically yes, any Roman citizen in the provinces can travel each year to Rome to vote in the elections, but only the very wealthy would do this and even then I doubt it. In OTL some of the Emperors were quite adept at promoting provincial elites to the Senatorial order. In some cases these same elites relocated to Rome, in other cases it was merely ceremonial. Claudius promoted a number of Gallic elites to the Senatorial order, despite heavy criticism from the traditional Roman aristocracy.

From our perspective even with the major shortcomings of a lack of provincial representation, it didn't seem to be an issue for the Romans at the time. There were remarkably few uprisings during the Principate which had political independence/representation as their focus. Most rebellions focused on who would rule Rome, not breakaway movements.

As I said earlier I've had to try to balance between what should be implemented as opposed to what would be implemented.

TaylorS wrote: During the Principate (Early Empire) the local city governments still had lots of autonomy as long as they stayed loyal and paid their taxes.

That's right. As I stated earlier the average Roman in the provinces wouldn't really notice the difference. The major change will occur in Rome itself where the Senate becomes the authority for provincial appointments. In OTL the Emperor appointed prefects to the Imperial provinces as they acted on his behalf. In a legal sense the Emperor exercised Imperium over the provinces and the prefects were only acting on his delegated authority. In TTL this will no longer be the case and the provinces will return to the purview of the Senate, where a pro-consul/pro-praetor is commissioned with Imperium over their allocated province, on behalf of the Senate and the People of Rome.

I hope to have the update in the next few days.

[Shogun]

Any updates?

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Drusus' Reforms)

“As for the Roman constitution, it had three elements, each of them possessing sovereign powers: and their respective share of power in the whole state had been regulated with such a scrupulous regard to equality and equilibrium, that no one could say for certain, not even a native, whether the constitution as a whole were an aristocracy or democracy or despotism. And no wonder: for if we confine our observation to the power of the Consuls we should be inclined to regard it as despotic; if on that of the Senate, as aristocratic; and if finally one looks at the power possessed by the people it would seem a clear case of democracy” –Polybius. The Histories.

http://www.missyellarose.com/pics/slides/Roman%20Senate.jpg

The extent to which Augustus influenced Drusus’ political development has been the subject of intense scholarly debate for millennia. A number of contemporary sources hint at an older and wiser Augustus mitigating the youthful spirit of Drusus through reason and debate. Many of these sources are contradictive, some asserting that Drusus did not allow himself to be swayed, others that he was willingly led by his father. But perhaps the greatest source of information on this point would be the constitution itself.

The constitution of Drusus is a remarkable document that perhaps best illustrates the political ideology of its author. It is a conservative document, and we can be sure that if Drusus lived during the turbulent times of Caesar and Cato he would be an optimate, for it clearly reflects a traditionalist outlook. Although it was not the perfect balance in the vein of Polybius‘ ideal republic, some of it being subject to revision within decades, by and large it set the foundations for a stable structure of government which had eluded Rome since the darks days of Gracchus and Marius. It is a great sense of irony that the long dictatorial reign of Augustus created the perfect situation for his successor to enact such long ranging reforms which would restore a sense of libertas to the Senate and indeed the people of Rome. However it was not without its contemporary critics, with the Greek writer Onomacles [1] describing it thus:

“So far as he was able Drusus sought to temper the tyranny of monarchy with the dictatorship of aristocracy – whereas democracy, that purported ferocious beast of unending misery, was consigned to spectate upon the miseries of its own creation which it in the end overwhelmingly endorsed.” –Onomacles. The Centres of Power. (9.8) [2]

It must be said that the constitution alone did not form the entirety of the Drusian reforms. Nor was it entirely original. Much of the foundations of Drusus’ reforms can be seen in Sulla’s own attempts to reorganise the republic generations earlier. However, where Sulla failed Drusus largely succeeded.

Contrary to popular opinion the primary aim of the constitution was not to provide a stable form of government, although this of course was an important consideration, rather it was always Drusus’ intention that main purpose of the constitution would be to form a comprehensive statement about what it was to be Roman. It was also his intention that it remain in the consciousness of everyday life. For that reason the constitution begins with the claim it is a sacred document to which it is every Romans duty, whether senator, patrician, equestrian or plebian, to protect its sacrosanctity and whosoever violates or fails to protect it is guilty of treason.

This undertaking, grave and serious though it may be, was not in vain, for within the constitution it guaranteed a number of protections to those who upheld it. This is clear where the beginning of the constitution affirms ancient principles to which Rome has always held. That is, it confirmed the ancient rights and privileges of citizenry - the right to provoco (appeal), protection from torture or the death penalty (except if guilty of treason or when serving in the legion), and the right to vote and partake in elections amongst many others.

It was suggested at one time that Drusus sought to expand on this - to include the definitions of the various social classes such as the senatorial classes and equestrian classes. In the end the opening ‘statements’ of the constitution were kept brief and thus restricted to those principles in which all Romans would be in agreement. In this there was nothing controversial about citizenry, and further more refined definitions would be left to Roman law. The reasons for this will be explained later.

Princeps

Although it was Drusus’ intention that the constitution would form the nucleus of society, which in many ways it did, it is today far more famous for the reforms it instituted to the system of governance. We have already seen how Augustus’ reforms shaped the republic, with himself at its head as Princeps. Drusus was able to build on these reforms, and extend them in such a way which restored both auctoritas and potestas to the Senate.

It must be remembered that Augustus’ position as Princeps was a unique one. Theoretically he held the legal powers of formerly republican positions, that is – of the princeps senatus, censor, pontifex maximus, consul and tribune. To this should also be added the entirely unique proconsular imperium maius which he held outside of Rome. This gave him not only legal authority within Rome and without, but it also gave him a primacy which superseded all other rivals. Augustus was always careful to describe his position as exceeding all others in ‘authority’ only, but being equal to each of his peers who held magistracies. Of course this was a delicate fiction designed to cloak the autocratic and dictatorial nature of the regime.

In these circumstances the simplest means to restore the republic would be for Drusus to merely abolish the position of princeps. Whether Drusus ever seriously countenanced such a move in his youth is still a matter of debate. However what is clear is that by the time Drusus himself became princeps, he did not act to abolish his own position out of existence. Rather, he moved to curtail it and regulate it.

The reasons are quite clear, and do not require us to examine in depth his motivations. Whether it was the result of Augustus’ influence, or even Tiberius’ as some other writers allege, is largely irrelevant. The instability of the late republic was well known in Drusus’ time and it is far more likely that he had observed in his own experiences the inherent danger in simply restoring a structure that had proven to be so calamitous. From Drusus’ point of view the republic was a worthy and noble principle, but it needed protection and regulation from craven individuals. In contrast to Augustus, Drusus sought to protect the republic, not dominate it.

The constitution clarified clearly the power and limits of the Princeps. No longer would this position hold such dominance, but instead was reduced to the traditional roles of censor and pontifex maximus. In addition to this the Princeps would continue to hold a limited form of Tribunicia Potestas (Tribunicia Senatus – Tribune of the Senate), granting the position the ability to veto actions of the Senate if necessary and holding his person as sacrosanct – but the position was deprived of judicial functions, this reverting to the more traditional plebeian tribune.

In theory these were still potentially formidable powers at his disposal, the censor for example being the responsible officer for revising the list of the Roman classes including Senators. However an important distinction is preserved between the Augustan Princeps, and that of Drusus’. Although holding the ability of veto, the Princeps no longer held imperium within the city of Rome. Consequently, although he could present proposals before the Senate, he held no actual power to implement his wishes and thus relied upon the Senate’s judgment to approve it or not. Nor could the Princeps hold office as a Magistrate, this was strictly forbidden in the constitution. Thus he would always be restricted to the roles defined above, and no more.

So that Drusus’ republican credentials could not be doubted he also spelt out very clearly the method at which Rome would select its Princeps. Accession could not be passed down from one Princeps to another, nor could someone be ‘adopted’ into the position as he had. There could be only one and the Princeps was defined within the constitution as an elected official of the Senate, open only to Senators of consular rank. The position was elected for life and would cease to be filled on the death of its inhabitants. The Senate would vote on the successor four market days (almost one month) after the death of the former, and the election of the Princeps would require two-thirds majority approval before coming into effect. This high number, virtually unprecedented in Roman law at the time, was to ensure that the Princeps held overwhelming support from the leading citizens of Rome (ie, the Senate).

Cursus Honorum

Another important part of the constitution dealt with the cursus honorum. For this Drusus largely drew from Sulla’s earlier reforms which sought to place firm restrictions on the progression of individuals climbing the political ladder. The age restrictions on the various positions were confirmed, that is 40 for the Consuls, 39 for the Praetors, 36 for Aedile and 30 for Quaestors. These restrictions were confirmed by the constitution, where it was explicitly stated no exceptions could be made for the appointment of these offices. Drusus also confirmed the Sullan limits of consecutive terms for Consuls, thus instituting that a second Consulship could only be attempted after an interval of ten years. In contrast to Sulla he kept the traditional powers of the Plebeian Tribune intact, but placed on them the same consecutive limits as for the Consuls above. In the original constitution of 14 A.D. the plebeian tribunes continued to be only restricted to those of the plebeian class. This distinction would later be modified some decades later where it would be open to all class but senators.

Drusus resisted the attempts to codify within the constitution the number and duties of these officials. Augustus had reduced the number of Praetors to twelve and the number of Quaestors to twenty. Instead this discretion would be at the disposal of the Senate and would, in time, be periodically revised by that chamber depending on their requirements.

http://oi50.tinypic.com/jl4i7o.jpg
The Constitutional Framework of Drusus' reforms

The Senate and Assemblies of Rome

The role of the Senate became enshrined as the centrepiece of the constitution and indeed of the Roman state itself. Although it had been the case for generations, the constitution finally confirmed the Senate as the principal legislative body of Rome. Only legislation approved by the Senate could be presented before the Assemblies for ratification, and even then this was not a necessity but often used as a useful tool to gauge broader public opinion.

One of the more interesting changes instituted by Drusus was that of the Assemblies. Under Augustus the Assemblies had lost most of their functions and political independence. The comitia curiata for example no longer retained its ability to confirm the imperium of the magistracy, instead it was reduced to confirm wills and ratify family adoptions. To that extent the curiata assembly had lost its political relevancy. Drusus kept the curiata assembly largely in place, despite its lack of relevancy it continued to function as an honorary assembly with little real power.

The comitia centuriata (Century Assembly) under Augustus had also lost much of its power and independence. The assembly was deprived of its legislative and judicial functions, retaining only its electoral capacity for the higher executive magistrates. But even this power was limited as Augustus had reorganised the centuries to favour more strongly the senatorial and equestrian classes. Since these classes owed their own career progression to Augustus they would have a strong interest in voting for his favoured candidates. Consequently, it could be argued the Century Assembly had become a largely irrelevant formality.

In this context Drusus took away on the one hand, and restored with the other. Under the constitution the Century Assembly was stripped of its final electoral powers to elect the higher magistrates. The spectacle of Assembly elections had long been considered a farce, with the centuries either voting strictly in accordance with Augustus’ decree or being subject to heavy bribes from aspiring candidates. The election of the higher magistrates now reverted to the Senate, who would vote amongst their peers that years Consuls or Praetors. From Drusus’ point of view the Century Assembly had, through its own actions, made itself irrelevant and unnecessary. Perhaps a good indication of its impotence is that the formal removal of its powers solicited no significant criticism, if anything Drusus was heavily praised for it.

There was one area in which the Century Assembly was to retain significance. Traditionally the centuriata was also the one assembly which confirmed the decree of the Senate when a declaration of war was made. Under Augustus this was not necessary as he held this power alone. Drusus restored to the Century Assembly this ancient right, thus in some measure restoring its honour.

As for the comitia tributa (Tribal Assembly) Drusus kept it largely in place. Although there are clear elements of optimate conservatism in the constitution, Drusus understood that the people of Rome would need some kind of outlet in the political affairs of their country. To that end the Tribal Assembly retained its ability to elect the lower magistrates of Quaestors and Curule Aediles. As Quaestors were automatically admitted into the Senate after their term of office expired, this gave the Tribal Assembly some level of influence into the membership of the Senate. Although Drusus removed the Augustan requirement that only those of Senatorial classes could run for the lower magistrates, the retention of the extensive property qualifications meant that in reality very few members outside of this class could run for the office anyway.

The Tribal Assembly also absorbed many of the electoral functions of the old Concillium Plebis (the Plebeian Council), most particularly the ability to elect Plebeian Tribunes and Plebeian Aediles. Under Caesar and then Augustus the Plebeian Assembly had virtually ceased to exist, its electoral, judicial and legislative powers referred to the Senate. Drusus saw no need to resurrect the council in its entirety and what had once been a vast assembly was reduced to an honorary college of former plebeian tribunes (Collegium Plebeian Tribunata) which held no real power and functioned mainly for ceremonial purposes.

The Tribal Assembly retained some level of legislative functions, but only as an honour. There would be no example of a plebeian tribune bypassing the Senate and presenting legislation before the people. Legislation could only be presented after it had been passed by the Senate, and even then it was only for the purposes of consultation – with the result in the Tribal Assembly not being binding. It would become tradition for major legislative changes to be presented to the tributa as a means of ascertaining broader public support for a particular law. In this way, although the legal potency of the Tribal Assembly was significantly curtailed from Republican times (although not from Augustan times), the tributa continued to exercise relevancy in the government of Rome – thus providing a minor check on the power of the Senate.

The Provinces and proconsular imperium

We have already seen how Augustus exercised consular imperium within Rome and proconsular imperium outside of Rome through the nature of his Princeps. How this power was exercised in the provinces was through the novel combination of praefectus and senatorial pro-consul/pro-praetor control. Augustus had divided the Empire’s territories into Imperial and Senatorial provinces. In theory the Senate would administer the Senatorial provinces, each year electing officials within its order as to who would govern each territory. In this manner the Senate was the custodian and commissioning authority for a Governor’s proconsular imperium. Augustus was consistent in his approach to this, although he theoretically held imperium in all the provinces and thus could intervene if he so chose, largely he left the running of these provinces to the Senate.

However for the Imperial provinces the method was different. As Augustus held proconsular imperium throughout the entirety of the Empire, the Governors of Imperial provinces were chosen solely by him. In a legal sense these Governors did not hold any power of their own, but held it on behalf of Augustus. In that sense they were Praefectus and did not hold true imperium.

We have already seen the Drusian reforms to the position of Princeps, with the consequent effect that this method of appointment would be insufficient. The Princeps no longer held imperium outside of Rome, and consequently Praefectus would have no legal standing. Despite the important safeguards inherent in the new Princeps, it is revealing that Drusus did not simply abolish the distinction between Imperial and Senatorial provinces and revert it entirely to the Senate. Perhaps it was, as Drusus would later say himself, a method of safeguarding the integrity of the Empire that he chose to retain the distinction. However Drusus envisaged a time when this distinction would no longer be required:

“The matter of Imperial provinces is a necessary relic of the Augustan age. In time, and with the benefits of stability and bountiful pietas to the res publica, it would simply fade into obscurity where the Princeps as an officer of the Senate would be the equal of his peers in the delegation of provincial management.” –Drusus Caesar. De fundamentis rei publicae (4.2) [3]

Drusus retained the system of Imperial and Senatorial provinces, but only in the sense of the election of Governors. As the Princeps no longer held imperium outside of Rome he could no longer appoint Praefectus, but instead Senators were chosen who held their imperium directly from the Senate. Thus in this sense the Senate’s potestas was unchallenged in its ability to grant (and hold) imperium, but for the Imperial provinces the Princeps controlled the appointment of Senators. In this context the Princeps retained considerable influence over the patronage of certain Senators, but he was limited in that he could not appoint outside of the Senate. Furthermore, Drusus significantly enlarged the number of Senatorial provinces to include important provinces such as Spain, the Alpes provinces, Dalmatia, Raetia, parts of Gaul and crucially Egypt. Through this division he hoped to achieve a balancing act where the Princeps still held considerable clout but within the confines of the Senate.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rmhttp/schools/primaryhistory/images/romans/the_roman_army/r_birdoswald_fort.jpg

The regulation and payment of the Legions

As ambitious and far-reaching as the constitutional reforms described above were, they would be nothing if an ambitious and popular general, at the head of an army, decided to march on Rome and abolish its principles. Drusus was well aware of this, and the potent example of Sulla’s failed reforms provided an important example of how insignificant constitutional reforms could be if those leading the army chose not to respect it. We can see how important this concern was to Drusus where he devoted significant attention to the reforming of the legions.

Before Augustus and during the Republic armies were raised as campaign necessity dictated. At the end of a campaign they were brought back to Italy for demobilisation and settlement on smallholdings. After the Battle of Actium, Rome had some seventy legions under arms, an enormous number and evidently deemed unsustainable. Augustus reduced this number to twenty-eight and distributed them across the Empire primarily on the frontiers to serve as a defence against hostile tribes or that of Parthia.

These legions became a permanent fixture, serving for twenty years, followed by a period in reserve. After their service they would be discharged and receive money or land (or both). In this way discharge became an ongoing process, ending the phenomenon of large armies arriving in Italy together for demobilisation. Legionaries might be discharged to their province of origin, or more likely they would receive land or an allotment in a colonia in the province in which they had served.

All of this was paid for by Augustus, initially from his own resources and, after 6 AD, from a treasury fund the aerarium militare. This fund was sourced primarily by receipts from the inheritance and sales taxes. In a sense, Augustus was the army’s patron and in return the soldiers swore an annually renewable oath of allegiance to him. Of course Augustus could not physically control each and every army directly, as we have already seen this function was delegated to Praefectus or Legati who exercised this control on his behalf.

This is the context in which Drusus inherited the Roman army. Although Drusus was wildly popular with the troops, and there was no hint of disloyalty from their number (except the initial minor revolt which will be explained next chapter), he was acutely aware of the danger such power posed for any potential successor seeking to overthrow his reforms. Thus it was that Drusus took the extraordinary decision to confer these functions to the Senate, and thus deprive the Princeps of a major source of his power. Drusus also chose to enshrine these reforms within the constitution instead of via ordinary legislation in order to protect it institutionally.

Under the constitution the regulation and payment of the Roman Army was delegated to a Senatorial commission consisting of ten Senators chosen by lot. This commission, the decemviri militares, would administer the aerarium militare along with the discharge donatives. In this way the role of the Senate was reinstated as the patron of the army, and the annual oath to the Princeps was replaced by the traditional annual oath, the Senatus Populusque Romanus (to the Senate and the people of Rome). It was also expressly forbidden for an individual to offer any form of donatives to the army, nor for soldiers to accept it, without the direct authorisation of the commission. Any individual so guilty of this offence would have committed treason.

In time the decemviri militares would gain further oversight of the army through the organisation and selection of subordinate officers. This commission would not interfere with the appointment of provincial commanders, but would in time ensure that each army did not consist of personal loyalists to the Governor. The long tradition of patronage would continue, but exist under the umbrella of a series of checks and balances that would mitigate the dangers of armed revolts.

Constitutional Protections

The real genius of the Drusian constitution concerned the protections inherent within its nature. Historians generally credit the Greek philosopher Aristotle as the first individual to make a formal distinction between ordinary law and constitutional law, but while this principle may already have been established Drusus sought to not only elevate the constitution as Jus Cogens (latin: compelling law) above all other laws but to also protect its repeal or derogation. It is important to note that while we today associate the principle of Jus Cogens with the idea of a law being unable to be modified ever, in the first century this definition only referred to its supremacy over all other legislation and not its unalterable nature in perpetuity.

The final protections inherent in the constitution concerned its ability to be revised and amended. As the constitution became the principle legal document of Rome, it superseded and took primacy over all other legislation. However even Drusus knew there would be occasions at which it may need to be amended. To prevent this from happening opportunistically or too often he put a number of obstacles in place. In essence he sought to make the changing of the constitution a costly affair that would take time and consideration. To that end he proposed a number of safeguards within the law itself, a hitherto original and entirely revolutionary concept, and one in which Drusus has secured his everlasting fame as a pronounced reformer.

Drusus was not above using religion as a tool for political purposes, and in perhaps his most blatant interference in religious affairs he used his authority as pontifex maximus to decree that the constitution was a sacred document ordained by Jupiter and the pantheon of Rome. To affect any changes to such a document would require the approval of all the various authorities in Rome. Thus amendments would require the majority assent of all the following bodies:

• The Senate;
• The Comitia Centuriata;
• The Comitia Tributa;
• The Comitia Curiata;
• The Collegium Plebeian Tribunata;
• The Collegium Pontificum; and
• The Princeps

Quite clearly it can be seen that constitutional change would be difficult and require the assent of each of the above bodies. It would also need the approval of the Princeps who could always veto the proposal in the Senate, but arguably also exercise his influence through the College of Pontiffs. This was the principal reason why Drusus refrained from making the constitution too prescriptive, else it might hinder future generations the ability to make meaningful and necessary reforms through the normal process of the Senate. However for those matters which were fundamental to the State, they were enshrined and protected within the constitution.

By placing all these obstacles Drusus was able to ensure that only the most serious and necessary changes were effected to the constitution – thus ensuring its longevity and ultimately its integrity. Though it was not always adequate to confront the various challenges that would inflict Rome, nor would it entirely remove the threat of a dictatorial Emperor, it undeniably provided the stability which ensured the importance of the Senate and through that body the people of Rome.

-----------------
[1] An original surviving author from TTL.
[2] A TTL quotation.
[3] A TTL quotation.

[Velasco]

Wow...fantastic. Great update! Just one thought: won't Drusus' son (or legal heir) inevitably become the next Princeps? Even if the position isn't hereditary, the father's wealth, prestige and clientele are. Inversely, opening up the position to candidates outside the Julio-Claudian clan might end up imperilling the welfare of Drusus' own children/descendants.

[Shogun]

Are there any further (lasting) expansions of the Roman Empire in the offing as this timeline goes on? Perhaps an expansion to the Vistula/Dneister frontier with a Hadrian's Wall at the mouth of the Jutland peninsula?

[TaylorS]

So an elective constitutional monarchy with a powerful senate? Fascinating! :D

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Very interesting. Like Tiberius in OTL, Drusus has formalized the Senate's role as legislature and taken the election of senior magistrates away from the people, but has reinstated free election of junior magistrates which, as you say, gives the people a chance to change the Senate's composition over time. This is a system in which both the Princeps (as Censor) and the people (through election of quaestors) can create senators, meaning that however technically supreme the senate may be, it cannot disregard either.

The elimination of the plebeian assembly makes perfect sense. The class conflict of the Principate is not between patricians and plebeians, but between the senators and everyone else. The tribunes of the plebs are now tribunes of the people. And they retain the veto, which is (at least IMO) the biggest surprise in Drusus' reforms: I'd have thought that he would consider the tribunes of the late Republic to be rabble-rousers and loose cannons (loose catapults?) and that he would allow, at most, a neutered tribunate. Maybe, though, he figured that removing the tribunes' power to propose legislation would sufficiently tame them, and that the veto was a necessary safeguard against too much concentration of power in the Senate. Also, there might be less popular unrest if the people could look to the tribunes to speak for them rather than feeling that they had no voice at all.

My gut feeling is that, over time, the tribunate will become a means for the equites and the upper middle class to assert themselves against the senate, and that many of the quaestors will likewise come from rising families, with the lower orders hooked into the system through clientage but otherwise ignored. Speaking of which, will there be a revival of the republican tradition of officials building public works and funding public-welfare projects out of their own pockets? The Augustan tax system has probably made such things unnecessary, and senior magistrates will no longer need to compete for public acclaim, but such projects might still be an important part of establishing reputation and clientage, with senatorial families building public works and distributing largesse so that the public will vote for their younger members when they run for quaestor. If the senatorial families do end up competing with new families in the quaestor elections, they'll probably fight for every advantage they can get.

Finally, the idea of a fundamental law that cannot be changed like ordinary laws is something revolutionary. This, I suspect, is what will make everyone decide that Drusus is a genius: that he has avoided Sulla's fate by building safeguards against repeal into the law itself. I suspect that ambitious senators will spend generations looking for loopholes (including loopholes that involve legions marching on Rome) but that the great majority of people, who want stability and prosperity, will support the reforms.

[euromellows]

Thanks for the posts. Greatly appreciated.

Wow...fantastic. Great update! Just one thought: won't Drusus' son (or legal heir) inevitably become the next Princeps? Even if the position isn't hereditary, the father's wealth, prestige and clientele are. Inversely, opening up the position to candidates outside the Julio-Claudian clan might end up imperilling the welfare of Drusus' own children/descendants.

Yes, I expect this would be the case - at least initially. In the future the clientele links would be more broad and while Drusus' children and grandchildren are the direct beneficiary of his legacy, over time this would start to become marginal. Does opening up the position outside of the dynasty imperil their safety? Perhaps, but it was no different then what happened in OTL with a de-facto dynastic succession. See Tiberius', Caligula's and Nero's own purges. Drusus could hardly legislate for the position to be hereditary, it would go against not only his own principles but the abhorrence Rome held in general against monarchy.

Are there any further (lasting) expansions of the Roman Empire in the offing as this timeline goes on? Perhaps an expansion to the Vistula/Dneister frontier with a Hadrian's Wall at the mouth of the Jutland peninsula?

Well at the moment in the timeline Rome has secured up to the Elbe. There are a few reasons for this but the primary reason is because it was OTL Augustan policy. If you removed the Teutoberg disaster the Romans would have remained. I've also been fortunate to sail up the Elbe in my time with the Navy and it is an easily accessible and navigable river. I'm confident the Romans could manage it with ease. It is also not too far from the more populous provinces of Gaul.

As to expansion beyond the Elbe I'm less confident, at least in this era. While the much vaunted Vistula/Dneister frontier is shorter, it would require significant investment to achieve. It also drastically extends the lines of communication. I'm not convinced Rome would pursue it until the area was sufficiently developed to provide an economic incentive. Also a Hadrian's Wall type fortification across the Eider would only make sense up to the Oder, and even then only accessing it overland from the Elbe. If the Romans possess the Vistula they would need to control the entirety of Jutland to keep open lines of communication.

The elimination of the plebeian assembly makes perfect sense. The class conflict of the Principate is not between patricians and plebeians, but between the senators and everyone else. The tribunes of the plebs are now tribunes of the people. And they retain the veto, which is (at least IMO) the biggest surprise in Drusus' reforms: I'd have thought that he would consider the tribunes of the late Republic to be rabble-rousers and loose cannons (loose catapults?) and that he would allow, at most, a neutered tribunate. Maybe, though, he figured that removing the tribunes' power to propose legislation would sufficiently tame them, and that the veto was a necessary safeguard against too much concentration of power in the Senate. Also, there might be less popular unrest if the people could look to the tribunes to speak for them rather than feeling that they had no voice at all.

As always your comments are insightful and appreciated. With regard to the tribunes you make a good point in that these tribunes could be more tributa tribunes as opposed to plebeian tribunes. However I kept this structure in place as from my readings it appears Augustus also allowed the tribunes to continue, although my source seems to indicate they were appointed either directly by him or in the Senate. Theoretically they retained their veto but of course the use of it would be dangerous in such an atmosphere. So while potentially you could have a trouble-making tribune using his veto at every opportunity, he is unable to bypass the Senate and present legislation. As he would possess no imperium he will need to answer for his reckless use of the veto after his term.

You do raise a good point though. In the Republic only a plebeian could attain this role. Perhaps under Drusus the criteria should either prohibit senators holding the post, or open only to those of the humiliores (was this term used in the early principate?). Making sure the tribune is not a Senatorial officer also increases the potential repercussion in the above scenario, as he will not be judged solely by his peers (as Senators are).

Unfortunately I wasn't able to ascertain how many tribunes were appointed during this time annually. I understand that in the aftermath of the Conflict of Orders in the Republic there was initially two tribunes elected, but this grew over time to ten (?). Two would seem a more logical number to maintain some level of control.

My gut feeling is that, over time, the tribunate will become a means for the equites and the upper middle class to assert themselves against the senate, and that many of the quaestors will likewise come from rising families, with the lower orders hooked into the system through clientage but otherwise ignored. Speaking of which, will there be a revival of the republican tradition of officials building public works and funding public-welfare projects out of their own pockets? The Augustan tax system has probably made such things unnecessary, and senior magistrates will no longer need to compete for public acclaim, but such projects might still be an important part of establishing reputation and clientage, with senatorial families building public works and distributing largesse so that the public will vote for their younger members when they run for quaestor. If the senatorial families do end up competing with new families in the quaestor elections, they'll probably fight for every advantage they can get.

I see such an evolution taking place as well. I envisage the building of public works and funding of games will continue to be a means of attaining office. In time this may even develop into a method of climbing the ranks for wealthy citizens outside of the traditional senatorial class.

Finally, the idea of a fundamental law that cannot be changed like ordinary laws is something revolutionary. This, I suspect, is what will make everyone decide that Drusus is a genius: that he has avoided Sulla's fate by building safeguards against repeal into the law itself. I suspect that ambitious senators will spend generations looking for loopholes (including loopholes that involve legions marching on Rome) but that the great majority of people, who want stability and prosperity, will support the reforms.

You make a good point. I think I will go back at some point and revise this chapter to touch on the revolutionary aspect of these protections. I could be wrong, but the idea of enshrining safeguards within the law itself may be a first at this time. This is probably an example of my 21st century outlook projecting itself on to the story.

[Jonathan Edelstein]

So while potentially you could have a trouble-making tribune using his veto at every opportunity, he is unable to bypass the Senate and present legislation. As he would possess no imperium he will need to answer for his reckless use of the veto after his term.

Fair point. Presumably the tribunes would be of two kinds: equites from rising families looking for a sinecure to pad their political resumes, and genuine populists willing to risk prosecution at the end of their terms in order to promote real reform. The first group would want to ingratiate themselves with the Senate, and probably wouldn't exercise their veto much; the second would use the veto, or the threat of a veto, to negotiate amendments to bills.

You do raise a good point though. In the Republic only a plebeian could attain this role. Perhaps under Drusus the criteria should either prohibit senators holding the post, or open only to those of the humiliores (was this term used in the early principate?). Making sure the tribune is not a Senatorial officer also increases the potential repercussion in the above scenario, as he will not be judged solely by his peers (as Senators are).

As best I can tell, the legal distinction between honestiores and humiliores appeared sometime in the second century. Drusus' constitution will probably butterfly this distinction away, at least in part, because it forbids the death penalty for all citizens (one of the key differences between honestiores and humiliores was that the latter were liable to capital punishment).

Forbidding senators to serve as tribunes would make sense, though. Such a measure would be enormously popular with the equites and the class just below them, and might even have the support of the Senate - after all, the tribunate is no longer a ticket to the senior magistracies, and the senators might come to think of such an office as beneath them.

Unfortunately I wasn't able to ascertain how many tribunes were appointed during this time annually. I understand that in the aftermath of the Conflict of Orders in the Republic there was initially two tribunes elected, but this grew over time to ten (?). Two would seem a more logical number to maintain some level of control.

I've also seen the number ten. There are certain advantages to having that many - for instance, if a majority of the tribunes are of the ingratiating, social-climbing sort, they could work together to control the minority of rabble-rousers. (Could tribunes veto each other? I believe so, but I'm not certain, and if so, Drusus might want as many as possible.)

With the Augustan reforms as a starting point, Drusus may well keep the number at ten, or at least reduce it to a number between two and ten rather than all the way to two.

Also, do the tribunes have the power to lay bills before the Senate, in the way they had previously been able to put them before the popular assembly? Such bills would not become law unless the Senate approves, thus preserving the balance of power, but would give the people (through the tribunes) an opportunity to make their concerns heard and force the Senate to at least consider those concerns.

I could be wrong, but the idea of enshrining safeguards within the law itself may be a first at this time. This is probably an example of my 21st century outlook projecting itself on to the story.

I believe this is correct. The idea of a constitution as a type of "super-law," immune from ordinary legislative procedures, would be something very new and revolutionary at the time. As I said, this part of the law is what will convince everyone that Drusus is a genius.

[euromellows]

Fair point. Presumably the tribunes would be of two kinds: equites from rising families looking for a sinecure to pad their political resumes, and genuine populists willing to risk prosecution at the end of their terms in order to promote real reform. The first group would want to ingratiate themselves with the Senate, and probably wouldn't exercise their veto much; the second would use the veto, or the threat of a veto, to negotiate amendments to bills.

Agree with that assessment. There might also be a bit of conflict between these emerging groups of tribunes, particularly if there are ten of them annually.

As best I can tell, the legal distinction between honestiores and humiliores appeared sometime in the second century. Drusus' constitution will probably butterfly this distinction away, at least in part, because it forbids the death penalty for all citizens (one of the key differences between honestiores and humiliores was that the latter were liable to capital punishment).

Forbidding senators to serve as tribunes would make sense, though. Such a measure would be enormously popular with the equites and the class just below them, and might even have the support of the Senate - after all, the tribunate is no longer a ticket to the senior magistracies, and the senators might come to think of such an office as beneath them.

I think you're right, but how to engineer it is the question. Drusus would have inherited the requirement that the tribunes had to be plebeian, but as you've said earlier the conflict during the principate is no longer patrician/plebeian but senatorial/others. As we know many tribunes were in fact senators as well as plebeian. On the other hand since Drusus has taken the Caesar/Augustus precedence of abolishing the concillium plebis he may as well go ahead and reform this position too. Is it something you think should definately be addressed immediately, or perhaps by Drusus' successors? I'm agnostic on this point to be honest but see the merit in it.

I've also seen the number ten. There are certain advantages to having that many - for instance, if a majority of the tribunes are of the ingratiating, social-climbing sort, they could work together to control the minority of rabble-rousers. (Could tribunes veto each other? I believe so, but I'm not certain, and if so, Drusus might want as many as possible.)

With the Augustan reforms as a starting point, Drusus may well keep the number at ten, or at least reduce it to a number between two and ten rather than all the way to two.

Also, do the tribunes have the power to lay bills before the Senate, in the way they had previously been able to put them before the popular assembly? Such bills would not become law unless the Senate approves, thus preserving the balance of power, but would give the people (through the tribunes) an opportunity to make their concerns heard and force the Senate to at least consider those concerns.

You make a good point about the number of tribunes. And yes, tribunes could veto each other which is part of why Tiberius Gracchus was so controversial. He ended up having his colleague Marcus Octavius forcefully removed from the Concilium Plebis as Octavius continued to veto his legislation. By violating his colleague's sacrosanctity he undermined some of his own support from amongst the plebeians.

The cynic in me could see this situation played to the advantage of the Senate. By manipulating a friendly tribune to veto their own colleagues the Senate can hide behind the fiction that they didn't veto the tribunes action - his peers did.

As for tribunes presenting legislation before the Senate, you present an interesting proposal. While the ultimate power still lies with the Senate, their ability to propose legislation might give them an outlet of some kind. But it could also be dangerous and lead to unnecessary antagonism. It might be safer, and probably more consistently optimate, for this not to be the case - a tribune could always try and enlist a senator to sponsor the bill. This might be something covered under ordinary legislation then the constitution.

I believe this is correct. The idea of a constitution as a type of "super-law," immune from ordinary legislative procedures, would be something very new and revolutionary at the time. As I said, this part of the law is what will convince everyone that Drusus is a genius.

Yes, I see the light now. I will edit the last chapter to reflect this more accurately.

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Drusus would have inherited the requirement that the tribunes had to be plebeian, but as you've said earlier the conflict during the principate is no longer patrician/plebeian but senatorial/others. As we know many tribunes were in fact senators as well as plebeian. On the other hand since Drusus has taken the Caesar/Augustus precedence of abolishing the concillium plebis he may as well go ahead and reform this position too. Is it something you think should definately be addressed immediately, or perhaps by Drusus' successors? I'm agnostic on this point to be honest but see the merit in it.

Maybe this would be something for Drusus' successors to address, or else for Drusus himself to institute after a constitutional crisis. Forbidding senators from holding an office wouldn't sit easily with his optimate sensibilities, and reforming the tribunate might take a crisis similar to what caused it to be created in the first place. Maybe the rebellion you mentioned in the last update could be the catalyst, or maybe it would happen later, after some dispute in which senatorial tribunes get in the way of overwhelmingly popular reforms.

The cynic in me could see this situation played to the advantage of the Senate. By manipulating a friendly tribune to veto their own colleagues the Senate can hide behind the fiction that they didn't veto the tribunes action - his peers did.

And that's also why they'd want ten of them, or maybe even more - even if nine of the ten are populists, all it would take is one to undo their work (although, on the other hand, that one can't be everywhere at once).

It might be safer, and probably more consistently optimate, for this not to be the case - a tribune could always try and enlist a senator to sponsor the bill. This might be something covered under ordinary legislation then the constitution.

There are certainly enough senators so that, under most circumstances, a reformist tribune would be able to find a sponsor. And even without the power to introduce bills, the tribunes would have leverage through their veto - "pass this in its present form and I'll kill it, add these amendments and I'll let it through." In fact, the tribunes could probably use this threat as a de facto means of introducing legislation, by threatening to veto a bill unless an "amendment" completely unrelated to the original bill is added. These are classical Romans - if there's a way to game the system, they'll do it.

[euromellows]

Amended the last chapter to address these points - hinting at further changes to the tribunes and more fully acknowledging the revolutionary nature of the safeguards.

Maybe this would be something for Drusus' successors to address, or else for Drusus himself to institute after a constitutional crisis. Forbidding senators from holding an office wouldn't sit easily with his optimate sensibilities, and reforming the tribunate might take a crisis similar to what caused it to be created in the first place. Maybe the rebellion you mentioned in the last update could be the catalyst, or maybe it would happen later, after some dispute in which senatorial tribunes get in the way of overwhelmingly popular reforms.

I've decided to leave this change with Drusus' successor. It actually coincides quite well with a future Princeps I have in mind and would be consistent with his OTL behaviour too. The minor rebellion I referenced won't be the appropriate catalyst.

There are certainly enough senators so that, under most circumstances, a reformist tribune would be able to find a sponsor. And even without the power to introduce bills, the tribunes would have leverage through their veto - "pass this in its present form and I'll kill it, add these amendments and I'll let it through." In fact, the tribunes could probably use this threat as a de facto means of introducing legislation, by threatening to veto a bill unless an "amendment" completely unrelated to the original bill is added. These are classical Romans - if there's a way to game the system, they'll do it.

I think it's probably safer, from the Senate's point of view at least, that the ability to propose legislation remains the purview of that body. Tribunes will have some level of influence due to their veto and I wouldn't be surprised if some level of leverage is exerted as you have described above. While you might rarely get the occasional political activist, most tribunes will probably be heavily influenced by senators - either through formal patronage or outright bribery. There's also a risk that the tribunes may be employed by rival senators to frustrate their peers ambitions through the use of vetos.

On a day-to-day level the tribunes most important function I suspect will be their ability to enforce provoco ad populum . For the common citizen this will likely keep their confidence that they retain protections under the law, albeit very marginal real influence on the political process.

Next update should be up in the next few days.

[Shogun]

Looking forward to the next update...

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Drusus' Reforms)

"Old men, mutilated by wounds are serving their 30th or 40th year. And even after your official discharge, your service is not finished. For you stay on with the colours as a reserve, still under canvas - the same drudgery under another name! And if you manage to survive all these hazards, even then you are dragged off to a remote country and settled in some waterlogged swamp or untilled mountainside. Truly the army is a harsh, unrewarding profession! Body and soul are reckoned at two and a half sesterces a day - and with this you have to find clothes, weapons, tents and bribes for brutal centurions if you want to avoid chores. Heaven knows, lashes and wounds are always with us! So are hard winters and hardworking summers..." -Unknown Roman Soldier on the mutiny of 14 A.D.

http://oi49.tinypic.com/206kfg0.jpg

The mutiny on the ascension of Drusus

Although it is tempting to assume that Drusus’ first priority on coming to power was the promulgation of the constitution and his surrendering of power to the Senate, this is not actually the case. Amongst the prevalent mythology surrounding the constitution there is also the fiction that Drusus dramatically resigned his offices and insisted on being elected Princeps through the new methods prescribed in the constitution. This also was not the case and there is no recorded instance in which he indicated this was ever his intention.

In fact in the immediate period following Augustus’ death Drusus held the same powers as his predecessor, only refusing in the first instance to accept the titles of Imperator and Augustus. He also refused to be named Pater Patriae (father of the country) responding that such a title could only be granted after a person’s life deeds had been fully examined (ie, until they had died). It may not have been his intention, but this would set a precedence followed by his successors in which the title would only be bestowed posthumously by the Senate, and the historical record would seem to suggest this was done sparingly.

Despite his republican sentiments there were instances where Drusus exercised this supreme authority, that is at least before the constitution became law in December 14 A.D. The first such example was during the short-lived mutiny amongst parts of the Roman Legion on Augustus’ death. The mutinies were chiefly in response to their harsher conditions of service, most particularly Augustus’ unpopular decision in 5 A.D. to increase the standard term of enlistment from 16 years to 20 years (plus 5 years reserve). But also it is probably indicative of the harsh nature of combat in the Illyrian Revolt which saw some of the most difficult fighting Rome had hitherto experienced. Indeed, it was in Pannonia where the mutiny began as faithfully recorded by the future Emperor and eminent historian Tacitus:

“This was the state of affairs at Rome when a mutiny broke out in the legions of Pannonia, which could be traced to no fresh cause except the change of emperors and the prospect it held out of license in tumult and of profit from a civil war. They had either not heard of Drusus’ republican intentions, or else chose to ignore it, for in the summer camp three legions were quartered, under the command of Junius Blaesus, who on hearing of the death of Augustus and the accession of Drusus, had allowed his men a rest from military duties, either for mourning or rejoicing. This was the beginning of demoralisation among the troops, of quarrelling, of listening to the talk of every pestilent fellow, in short, of craving for luxury and idleness and loathing discipline and toil. In the camp was one Percennius, who had once been a leader of one of the theatrical factions, then became a common soldier, had a saucy tongue, and had learnt from his applause of actors how to stir up a crowd. By working on ignorant minds, which doubted as to what would be the terms of military service after Augustus, this man gradually influenced them in conversations at night or at nightfall, and when the better men had dispersed, he gathered round him all the worst spirits.” –Tacitus. Annals. I. 21. [1]

Although we have the benefit of Tacitus’ observations, and they have preserved their authenticity to the present age, there are likely a range of other factors in addition to the above which caused the mutiny. One of the more important factors, somewhat referenced in Tacitus’ account, is that a great many of the soldiers in the Illyrian Campaign consisted of conscripts, emancipated slaves or undesirables. In normal circumstances the legions would recruit primarily from volunteers, but we have already seen how the emergency instigated by the Great Illyrian Revolt compelled Augustus to resort to such desperate measures to combat the crisis. The consequent effect of this is that the legion was filled with men less conditioned to the discipline of the legion, or at least men who did not see the legion as a career of choice. Furthermore many of the conscripts were men originating from Italy who were used to a higher standard of living than their provincial peers. In such circumstances their licentious behaviour is hardly surprising.

In his handling of the crisis it is telling that Drusus did not defer to the Senate for advice. Perhaps it was because he felt his long experience in the army gave him a unique insight into their grievances, or it may have been as some historians have contended that he had not yet planned to transfer the regulation of the legions to the constitution (some have argued the mutiny actually motivated this eventuality). In any event Drusus only consulted with his elder brother Tiberius who would also have considerable insight into the issues facing the army being as he was the principal commander during the Illyrian Campaign.

As it was, Tiberius was dispatched to treat with the mutineers directly. It is known that Drusus was initially sympathetic to their plight, but a number of reports of their grievous misconduct had reached him and it is likely that choosing to meet with them may, in a sense, legitimise their position. Furthermore it may have invited disaster if other armies throughout the Empire also staged a mutiny. Drusus was careful to act judiciously and the dispatch of his brother, renowned as a stern disciplinarian, was designed as a show of force. The Princeps would hear the troops complaints, but only after order had been restored and only from a position of strength. In case there was any doubt as to the seriousness of his stance Tiberius was accompanied by two praetorian cohorts, along with a considerable number of Praetorian cavalry and Germanic soldiers from the Batavi Guard (then part of the Princeps’ bodyguard).

Historians have generally viewed the mutiny as an isolated incident, due chiefly to the particular hardships of the Illyrian Campaign and the unique composition of its troops. The fact that no other troops throughout the Empire joined in the mutiny seems to validate this position. Those legions stationed in Germania Magna had also experienced difficult campaigning, in relatively impoverished lands, yet there was no mutiny there. There are likely a number of reasons for this, chiefly because they were made of standard normal recruits but also because Drusus himself was their commander for so many years. Even as Princeps he retained his immense popularity amongst their number, and whatever complaints they may have had about military service they did not provoke a violent response. However it is known that when news of the mutiny reached them their commander at the time, Lucius Epidius, tried to suppress its discovery. Inevitably it was leaked out and although there was no desire to licentiously take up arms against the state there was some level of sympathy struck amongst the troops. Evidently this news reached Drusus and according to the legends at the time his regard for the welfare of his old troops moved him to make some concessions to alleviate their plight.

It should be noted that for those troops in Illyria who had undertaken hostile actions, including the looting of nearby villages and assault on their officers, there was no quarter shown. As the direct officer on the ground Tiberius dealt harshly with the conspirators and stood his ground when threats were made against his person by those of the mob. But in general terms Drusus offered a number of improvements to their condition. Although their chief demands, namely an increase in daily pay from 2.5 sesterces to 4 and the reversion to 16 year terms of service, could not be met he did provide a guarantee for their discharge premium. One of the other major complaints of the mutiny was when a soldier discharged he was entitled to a one-off premium of 13 years salary, plus a parcel of land. However this was only granted when settling in the provinces where Augustus had dictated. If the soldier in question did not wish to settle there he would forgo his land and his premium. This would not be such a problem in the decades and centuries to come as most of the recruits would be made up of provincials. But for the early Principate it was a real problem as the majority of the recruits came from Italy and did not desire to settle in the far poorer provinces (in the case of Illyria and Germania Magna we are lead to believe the conditions were particularly horrible).

Although this does seem a harsh method of treatment for soldiers with a long record of service, it was an important mechanism for the state to control the spreading of settlements beyond Italy. By settling veteran soldiers in the provinces Rome was able to better exert control over the region and have a body of citizens in the area. To that end Rome couldn’t compromise on this important principle, it is unlikely Augustus would have and ultimately nor did Drusus. However he did make some concessions. Recognising the importance of such an incentive, but also the unfair nature of the system to the troops, Drusus moved to guarantee that, if a soldier was unwilling to retire to the designated province, he would still be entitled to at least half of the premium (although no grant of land). Furthermore he ensured that if a soldier was designated for retirement in a recently acquired (or frontier) province then the parcel of land would be substantially larger than those reserved for inner provinces (including on occasion Italy).

It may not have been everything the troops wanted, but it was certainly an improvement over their Augustan entitlements where they could end up with nothing. A half premium, roughly 6.5 years of wages, was still a significant sum for the average citizen and for those soldiers who were adamantly opposed to settlement in the provinces it gave them some security. In any event it was all that Drusus would concede, and those troops still rebellious in their conduct were dealt with harshly as an example by Tiberius. The mutiny, such as it was, dissipated shortly thereafter. [2]

Other Acts

Another important act which Drusus performed shortly after his ascension was the deployment of an extra legion in Germania Magna. We have already seen how Drusus, when commanding the troops of this province during the Germanic Rebellion of 5 A.D., had intended to cross the Elbe frontier and engage those Germanic tribes which had long made incursions into Roman territory. That Drusus was able to contain the situation with only three legions remains a remarkable feat, not least because it has been widely acknowledged that Augustus was effectively trying to conquer Germania on the cheap. Drusus well understood this, and his careful management of diplomacy as well as his own formidable tactical skills had prevented any serious losses in the region. While it is unlikely a lesser Commander would have suffered such a defeat on the scale of Varus’ infamous example at Kupa [3], it would still have been a challenging task in the event of a major provincial uprising coupled with a serious incursion across the Elbe.

It is unclear when the principle of the Roman limes (frontier/border) was firmly established, but already in Drusus’ time it appears the rate of Roman expansion had begun to slow. Some historians ascribe this to an instruction supposedly left by Augustus on his passing, but there is no strong evidence of this. While such an undertaking may be a partial explanation, more likely the truth is that the Roman Empire had met its natural limits for growth at this point.

The Elbe river, although a considerable distance from the Mediterranean, was easily supplied by forward positions in Gaul and proved to be navigable without much difficulty. The Elbe, along with the southern mountains of Bohemia from the Elbe Gap to the Iron Gates on the lower Danube, provided a naturally defensible frontier broken only by a few passes and occasional low-lying regions like the Beskids. Despite the apparent security of the ‘frontier’ it must be remembered that these lands were still relatively new additions, and the greatest threat to the early Principate was not so much foreign invasions as it was internal revolts. Drusus had learnt this with difficulty in 5 A.D., where tribes within the border had cause to ally with tribes across the border.

It is in this context we see in Drusus’ reign the beginnings of an emphasis on consolidation rather than expansion. To be sure this was never a firmly defined policy, and later expansions demonstrate that Rome continued to harbour some extraterritorial ambitions, nonetheless it is a sign of Drusus’ pragmatism that he sought to strengthen Rome’s hold in the region without pretensions to further expansion. Although this decision would, within a matter of months, be delegated formally to the Senate (and most notably to the decemviri militares in the constitution) it is interesting to note that the great body of opinion in Rome shared Drusus’ approach in this regard and sought to consolidate current possessions. The following table illustrates the number and deployment of Roman legions throughout the Empire at the beginning of Drusus’ reign:

http://oi48.tinypic.com/2sbwfav.jpg

-------------
[1] An amended version of the description in Tacitus’ Annals.
[2] Tiberius reportedly initially agreed to the terms of the mutineers in OTL but after it became apparent the state could not afford it he revoked his concessions, ordering his son to brutally supress them.
[3] Of course we know better…

Authors Note: Thanks for your interest Shogun. I swear you seem to only preempt me by a day or so.

[wannis]

Drusus Caesar. De fundamentum respublica (4.2)If I may correct your Latin, this ought to be "De fundamentis rei publicae" (fundamentum needs to be in the ablative case after de, classical Latin preferred to put fundamentum in the plural, and res publica needs to be in the genitive case).
Interesting POD. I don't know if I'm sold on the direction you're taking this - personally, I think that the trajectory Rome took IOTL, with an ever more escalating competition between leading politicians, culminating in one of them finally taking over and not letting go again, and the subsequent erosion of the remnants of alternative powerbases other than the office of the strongman and the army, was inevitable. Taking into account the client-based Roman politics, for which you needed money, and the fact that conquest and taxing the provinces were the quickest roads to riches, I don't see that an enduring balance comprising an independent senate would be possible.
But I'm ready to watch where this goes. :)

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

If I may correct your Latin, this ought to be "De fundamentis rei publicae" (fundamentum needs to be in the ablative case after de, classical Latin preferred to put fundamentum in the plural, and res publica needs to be in the genitive case).
Interesting POD. I don't know if I'm sold on the direction you're taking this - personally, I think that the trajectory Rome took IOTL, with an ever more escalating competition between leading politicians, culminating in one of them finally taking over and not letting go again, and the subsequent erosion of the remnants of alternative powerbases other than the office of the strongman and the army, was inevitable. Taking into account the client-based Roman politics, for which you needed money, and the fact that conquest and taxing the provinces were the quickest roads to riches, I don't see that an enduring balance comprising an independent senate would be possible.
But I'm ready to watch where this goes. :)

I agree, but its fun to see where hes going with it. You do note some of the statements about him ruling authoritarianly at the beginning, so its not a mystical 'republic is reborn and everyone lived happily ever after', like some try.

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

The idea of a constitution as a type of "super-law," immune from ordinary legislative procedures, would be something very new and revolutionary at the time. As I said, this part of the law is what will convince everyone that Drusus is a genius.
Not quite true. There are, of course, the semi-legendary Twelve Tables of early Rome. But they were, admittedly, a rather different kind of thing. AND that was a LONG time ago.

[euromellows]

If I may correct your Latin, this ought to be "De fundamentis rei publicae" (fundamentum needs to be in the ablative case after de, classical Latin preferred to put fundamentum in the plural, and res publica needs to be in the genitive case).

Thanks for this - I have amended as you suggested. My understanding of latin is virtually non-existent so I'm grateful for the contribution.

Interesting POD. I don't know if I'm sold on the direction you're taking this - personally, I think that the trajectory Rome took IOTL, with an ever more escalating competition between leading politicians, culminating in one of them finally taking over and not letting go again, and the subsequent erosion of the remnants of alternative powerbases other than the office of the strongman and the army, was inevitable. Taking into account the client-based Roman politics, for which you needed money, and the fact that conquest and taxing the provinces were the quickest roads to riches, I don't see that an enduring balance comprising an independent senate would be possible.
But I'm ready to watch where this goes. :)

Well I should point out that this timeline is still in its early stages and chronologically speaking it has only been a few decades since the original POD. Drusus' republican sentiments were OTL, but of course his reforms are only going to work as long his successors respect them. I don't see this removing all of Rome's problems - far from it. There will continue to be civil wars, disputed successions etc. However I envisage such events will take the form of OTL civil wars of 69 A.D or 193 A.D., ie a number of claimants to the position but once one is established a period of long stability. Since the Senate retains its importance, and the potential claimant wouldn't be anything other than a Senator as well, that body will always have a degree of influence into the nature of the reigning regime. Historically speaking the most stable Roman Emperors usually governed with either the support of the Senate, or at least they respected its role. In my opinion (and I am far from the authority on this) it was Septimius Severus' disregard for the Senate and his empowering of the army that dealt the first mortal blow to the Empire.

That being said I acknowledge that the chapter on the constitution did end on too high a note. I have amended this slightly to take into account your observations and allude to the fact that it did not solve all Rome's problems.

I hope you do keep reading (you too Dathi). I have planned for a number of unsavory events to strike the Empire in the future. I hope these will illustrate that I'm far from pretending Rome becomes a happy place where everybody gets on and respects the law.

[wannis]

Well I should point out that this timeline is still in its early stages and chronologically speaking it has only been a few decades since the original POD. Drusus' republican sentiments were OTL, but of course his reforms are only going to work as long his successors respect them. I don't see this removing all of Rome's problems - far from it. There will continue to be civil wars, disputed successions etc. However I envisage such events will take the form of OTL civil wars of 69 A.D or 193 A.D., ie a number of claimants to the position but once one is established a period of long stability. Since the Senate retains its importance, and the potential claimant wouldn't be anything other than a Senator as well, that body will always have a degree of influence into the nature of the reigning regime. Historically speaking the most stable Roman Emperors usually governed with either the support of the Senate, or at least they respected its role. In my opinion (and I am far from the authority on this) it was Septimius Severus' disregard for the Senate and his empowering of the army that dealt the first mortal blow to the Empire.
Just to make my views clear - I think having the senate as an alternative base of power not under the thumb of the princeps / emperor will actually destabilise Rome more than even a few mad tyrants like Caligula or Nero did. As I said, Roman client politics put the Republic on a trajectory where individual politicians had to amass ever more riches and military ressources in order to compete. IOTL Augustus ended that trajectory by eliminating the competition; of curse, the price was that the army and the pretorian guard became the final arbiters of power. Returning real power to the Senate, especially the power to dole out provinces and troops, will re-start the escalating trajectory, and the emperor will have to either claw that power back, preside over a civil war, or see some emerging strongman grab all power and depose him, together with the Senate. Yes, you're right that the Roman Empire worked better when the Emperors respected the Senate and let it participate, but that was because it was just a symptom of those Emperors' competence and moderation. As it was always clear that the Emperor had the final say and that any powers of the Senate were his to take back, inividual politicians were held in check. On the whole, I don't think that any constitutional set-up could have saved the Roman Empire from the dilemma that, due to its long and dangerous frontiers, it needed a big army that would always be a source of trouble, and that the legitimacy of the emperor was ultimately based on his military imperium.

I hope you do keep reading (you too Dathi).
I certainly will. We need more good Roman TLs. You may not share my analysis, but I can see that this is a well-researched and well-thought out TL, so I'm looking forward to see where it goes.

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (The Empire under Drusus)

“He was a good and moral man, always careful to do right to all men and follow his conscience. His one vice was that he wanted everyone to know how good a man he was.” –Gnaeus Proculus. Leaders of Rome. 4.15][1]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RFX2KT06_RE/T-LjfsD3mHI/AAAAAAAAIPo/FhyRLiaW6sA/s1600/roman+forum.jpg

The Empire under Drusus

The real legacy of Drusus' constitution would become apparent within his own reign. For the average Roman citizen in the provinces life continued largely as normal. The local Decurions maintained their positions of authority and the provincial governors continued to hold de-facto dictatorial powers. For most citizens it hardly mattered how their Governor was chosen, whether by Senatorial decree or by the Emperor directly. For the citizens in Rome however, and especially the Senators, the reign of Drusus brought in many subtle changes not always immediately apparent.

As Princeps Drusus’ legal power was limited by the Constitution and by virtue of not holding imperium. But his auctoritas was immense and unparalleled. Augustus had once stated that he too had possessed considerable auctoritas but did not exceed his peers in potestas, but in his case it was a deliberate fiction. Drusus on the other hand was always careful to ensure that, publicly at least, he adhered to the spirit of the Constitution. When, in the early days of his leadership, a number of citizens appealed their cases to him he did not entreat with them - citing that it was not within his power and they would need to seek the proper avenues of appeal. Another occasion is recorded where a delegation of equites requested his intervention in a dispute with a Senator about a commercial contract. Drusus refused to see them citing it was a matter for the courts.

Despite these instances of non-interference the Princeps held a considerable amount of influence behind the scenes mainly by virtue of the censorial powers inherent in his position. Drusus was always careful to never interfere directly in the conduct of Senators, but where allegations of impropriety reached him, and they could be substantiated, he always ensured the matter was dealt with. A faithful account of such an incident is recorded by Lucius Pansa who described the trial of Marcus Atilius Rufus, a Senator of praetor rank accused of corrupt governorship in Asia.

“A number of provincials had sought his ear in which he heard their reports of corruption and maladministration. After confirming the matter with his own people Drusus enlisted Gaius Pompeius Spurinna, a former Quaestor and newly admitted Senator, to prosecute the case with vigour before the Senate. Spurinna, known to be an ambitious man, found the request suitable to enhance his reputation and so the matter was dealt with publicly an instrument of Drusus' enlightened justice.” –Lucius Pansa, Memoirs (13.4)[2]

So far as we know Drusus never directly prosecuted a Senator himself, instead referring the matter to others on his behalf. The only cases in which he took a direct interest involved those he had personally assisted in their office, and even then he restricted himself to ensuring due process was followed and their alleged conduct did not reflect poorly on him.

However there were other examples in which Drusus’ influence was more blatant. A number of loyal Germanic chieftains and their sons were given Roman citizenship and in some cases even encouraged to run for Quaestor - a sure ticket into the Senate. A variation to the old Caesarian joke appeared during this time where the German, upon arriving in Rome, tore off his trousers and donned the toga asking ‘which way to the Senate?’ The new variation included the response, 'Through the Quaestorship citizen.' Since Drusus regulated to some extent the definitions of property ownership (a pre-requisite for magistracy) some of these Germanics were able to win election to the important posts. Invariably it was a manipulated process, but not to the extent that Caesar had taken it. Furthermore it would prove to be an important and effective tool in the gradual romanisation of Germania.

It is important to note that while this subtle manipulation undoubtably took place, it was not to the point of disenfranchising the elections. By placing his chosen candidates at the discretion of the people it ultimately gave their positions more legitimacy then could ever be obtained by a simple appointment. In fact there were only very rare occasions in which Drusus ever raised someone directly to the Senate, and in all cases they were long standing Roman citizens like in the case of Lucius Seius Strabo and Publius Varius Ligur who had both served as Praetorian Prefects under Augustus.

It is clear that the Senate acted with some reluctance in the early days. Having lived under the dominating Augustus for so long the Senators continuously deferred to Drusus' judgement in all things, as though they did not trust the sincerity of his reforms. In most cases Drusus did not provide firm direction, referring the matters to the respective Consuls or the Senate floor directly. However there were instances in which Drusus did wish to legislate and as is often the case with those in authority where the Princeps willed the Senate normally followed. Historians have long thought this was a result of his pressure behind the scenes, but the historical record is not always supportive of that. There were occasions when Drusus championed the law directly in the Senate, a rare move to be sure but perhaps more effective because of this apparent reluctance. Senators could potentially find themselves stripped of power if they did not support his pet projects and although there is no recorded instance in which this was the case (or at least not solely the case), clearly it was an ominous threat that shadowed many Senators to the point of paranoia.

There were also other means at Drusus' disposal to influence events. In some cases there remained Senators who no longer strictly met the extensive wealth criteria of their high station. When conducting the census these Senators would present themselves before Drusus personally and plead their case. Some of them came from ancient families and had fallen on hard times. Drusus dealt with them generously, much as Augustus had. In return for this generosity we can be sure a number of Senators were sufficiently grateful to their patron that they offered him the necessary support when it was required.

Another avenue to influence was the Princeps still considerable clout when it came to the assignment of provincial governors. Although most of the Imperial provinces were not as wealthy or influential as the Senatorial variety, they still provided an important opportunity for career advancement. This is particularly the case in the frontier provinces, where a skilled Governor would find himself in command of a number of Legions. These men owed their station largely to the Princeps, who controlled the appointments in these provinces, and consequently their support was well assured.

One area in which the Princeps came to dominate was foreign affairs. It is not clear whether this was by accident or by design. The Constitution was notably silent on it, except in the case of a declaration of war which required the assent of both the Senate and the Comitia Centuriata. For other matters like treaties or trade agreements the matter was less clear. Due to the nature of the Princeps perpetual position, Drusus continued to receive foreign correspondence marked for his attention. This is understandable when considering the annual nature of the magistrates - the Princeps provided a continuous and stable figure to communicate with the Roman State. This was not only the case with the various Roman client Kingdoms like Thracia and Numidia, but it also applied to the other great nations of Parthia and Kush. Drusus initially submitted such correspondence to the Senate and sought their views on a response, but this gradually subsided and by 24 A.D. was no longer the case. The Senate still formally ratified any treaties, they weren't law until done so, but the primary negotiations appear to have been the purview of the Princeps or his delegate.

Drusus did not use his Senatorial veto often but there were instances in which it was applied. In most cases he used it only as a means of examining an issue further. When the Consul Quintus Sergius Pusio proposed to abolish the controversial grain dole in 27 A.D., and it appeared the move would succeed for an ordinary plebeian tribune wasn't present, Drusus struck it down and proposed that the issue be examined in further detail - commissioning the rarely used collegium plebeian tribunata to provide a report to the Senate on the implications. Since many of the plebians on this council wouldn't be in favour of abolishing the dole it was a useful way of putting the motion off indefinately. Drusus' own personal feelings were somewhat in agreeance with the Senate, but the incident provides an important example of the important role of the Princeps balancing the interests of the people with those of the Senate.

Religion

One area in which Drusus showed pragmatic caution was that of the Pontiffs. The Pontiffs had long been considered a political role and in many ways were treated as a sinecure for aspiring politicians. Although this was still the case under Drusus, with political loyalties being rewarded, Drusus ensured the characters of the Pontiffs were beyond reproach. He was always careful to keep the reputation of the Pontificate protected, and only those of proven character were admitted. In cases of scandal Drusus was ruthless and stripped the individual of their position even without trial. Being a friend of Drusus would not be enough to prevent this, as we see in the case of Titus Collega who was an old friend guilty of an indiscretion with another Pontiff’s wife.

Drusus' approach to religion was broadly consistent with that of Augustus', particularly in relation to that of the Imperial cult worship. Where provincial towns proposed to worship him Drusus did not authorise it unless it was associated with Rome and furthermore the Constitution. While he wasn't above using religion to suit his political agenda, he was sparing with its application - maintaining that it was fundamental society respected the Gods, but also that the Government did so as well.

The Legions

Since the proclamation of the Constitution the administration of the Legions had been deferred to the Senatorial committee the 'decemviri militares'. The Constitution stipulated this was a commission of ten Senators chosen annually by lot. However it appears Drusus' soldierly instincts were hard to suppress, for even though he was not always an appointed member he ensured he was present for their deliberations and became a de facto 11th member by virtue of his Senatorial veto. Drusus displayed his natural reluctance to override his colleagues too abruptly, but he developed a reputation of paying close attention to deficiencies in the Legions stock and 'suggesting' such a development as a matter for remedy. Officially he was only an observer but his suggestions carried great weight and would often be enacted upon.

Personal Life

In relation to Drusus' personal life he developed a faithful reputation to his wife and a fatherly reputation for that of his children. He was unusual for a patrician Roman in his day never taking a male or boy lover. Also quite unusual was his marriage with Antonia Minor was a happy one.

Earlier in his life he had allowed his mother, Livia, to match his children with suitable partners. This was not always successful with his second son Claudius unhappily married to Plautia Urgulanilla and his daughter Livilla wedded to his nephew Pannonicus, also unhappily. Although in the case of his eldest son Germanicus the marriage to Vipsania Agrippina proved to be happy.

When his son Claudius divorced his first wife Plautia in 24 A.D. on the grounds of adultery, there was an attempt from Livia and Antonia to find a suitable replacement. The marriage had produced a son (the future Britannicus) and Drusus is reported to have directed his family not to interfere, allegedly citing his brother Tiberius' unhappy predicament as an example of interfering mothers. Claudius' second marriage to Volusia Flaccus proved to be a successful one, her character apparently far more compatible to his personality. Despite his earlier stance it is likely that Drusus wouldn't have entirely ignored his sons choice even if he wanted to. As the son of the Princeps the choice of wife would have had some level of political machinations, even if Drusus kept this consideration to a minimum.

Other

Drusus did not embark on any expensive foreign conquests or wars, except perhaps in the case of Germanicus' retaliatory raids into Germania Ulterior (across the Elbe). In this case they did not represent a lasting conquest, and there does not appear to have been the will to conquer yet more of Germania (at this stage of the Empire the least advanced and wealthy of all the provinces). On the contrary Drusus was content to use his reign as a period of consolidation and his dealings with Parthia and the various Germanic tribes reflect a pragmatic approach to foreign affairs that must have been refreshing to the Empire accustomed to civil wars and foreign excursions. In many ways it was this approach that would become, arguably, one of Drusus’ most important legacies to the Empire.

--------------
[1] TTL Quotation
[2] TTL Quotation

[wannis]

Interesting. So Drusus is still the final arbiter - that can work. Problems will begin if (when) politicians will start to see the emperor's reluctance as weakness and start testing the system. Probably not during Drusus's reign, but under a less wily or experienced successor...

[Nanwe]

AVE, I think this is my first comment on this TL and I must say that it is amazing. I have always had my own fascination with the Roman Empire & Republic, but well I always preferred the Antonine period, mostly because Trajan and Hadrian were from Spain, so well national links and all :p

Anyway, I have found this line:
The marriage had produced a son (the future Britannicus)
very intriguing, the Romans usually only gave the agnomen to victorious generals or conquerors, so I guess that since a battle in Britannia for nothing is illy, that implies that after Drusus' death, probably aroudn the same time as OTL, the Romans will invade and conquer Britannia?

If so I suppose that they will be more successful romanising it thanks to the experiences from Germania.

[Shogun]

Well at the moment in the timeline Rome has secured up to the Elbe. There are a few reasons for this but the primary reason is because it was OTL Augustan policy. If you removed the Teutoberg disaster the Romans would have remained. I've also been fortunate to sail up the Elbe in my time with the Navy and it is an easily accessible and navigable river. I'm confident the Romans could manage it with ease. It is also not too far from the more populous provinces of Gaul.

As to expansion beyond the Elbe I'm less confident, at least in this era. While the much vaunted Vistula/Dneister frontier is shorter, it would require significant investment to achieve. It also drastically extends the lines of communication. I'm not convinced Rome would pursue it until the area was sufficiently developed to provide an economic incentive. Also a Hadrian's Wall type fortification across the Eider would only make sense up to the Oder, and even then only accessing it overland from the Elbe. If the Romans possess the Vistula they would need to control the entirety of Jutland to keep open lines of communication.


I appreciate the response.

Then how about expansion beyond the Danube, like a conquest of Dacia (as in OTL under Trajan), but much more extensive, with the effect of extending the entire northeastern Roman frontier across the Danube beyond the Carpathian Mountains to the Dneister? Wasn't that area known, even in antiquity, as being rich in precious metals?

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Nice update as usual. Your Drusus is shaping up somewhat like Antoninus Pius - very respectful of the Senate and careful to observe the formal limits on his power, but also careful to let everyone know he's in charge. Come to think of it, this timeline seems a lot like what would happen if the Antonines rather than the later Julio-Claudians had been the ones to set the tone for the Principate - a republican Principate, certainly, but one in which the first citizen is definitely first.

[Superwes]

I thought it was a little ironic that you had a Rufus accused of corrupt governorship in Cilicia.

[euromellows]

Thanks for all the responses. Greatly appreciated.

Interesting. So Drusus is still the final arbiter - that can work. Problems will begin if (when) politicians will start to see the emperor's reluctance as weakness and start testing the system. Probably not during Drusus's reign, but under a less wily or experienced successor...

Indeed this will be the case. You're right in that Drusus will probably be fine, but his successors will bring a different approach and not always successful.

AVE, I think this is my first comment on this TL and I must say that it is amazing. I have always had my own fascination with the Roman Empire & Republic, but well I always preferred the Antonine period, mostly because Trajan and Hadrian were from Spain, so well national links and all

Thanks for the comment. I'm glad you're enjoying.

very intriguing, the Romans usually only gave the agnomen to victorious generals or conquerors, so I guess that since a battle in Britannia for nothing is illy, that implies that after Drusus' death, probably aroudn the same time as OTL, the Romans will invade and conquer Britannia?

If so I suppose that they will be more successful romanising it thanks to the experiences from Germania.

You picked up on that well. I've left a few other clues in the timeline as well, but in regards to Britain yes it will be conquered by the Romans in TTL and Britannicus will have a large role to play in that.

Then how about expansion beyond the Danube, like a conquest of Dacia (as in OTL under Trajan), but much more extensive, with the effect of extending the entire northeastern Roman frontier across the Danube beyond the Carpathian Mountains to the Dneister? Wasn't that area known, even in antiquity, as being rich in precious metals?

That's probably about the limit. My preference is for the Carpathians as they make a good frontier. In Dacia's case there is clear motivation and navigable rivers assist in communication. For Quadia there's probably less motivation in terms of native wealth - but the Tisza river would assist conquest and communication as well - there's no need to go beyond the Carpathians to the Dniester since it wouldn't be as good a frontier. There will be no conquest of Parthia or anything as grand as that in this timeline.

Nice update as usual. Your Drusus is shaping up somewhat like Antoninus Pius - very respectful of the Senate and careful to observe the formal limits on his power, but also careful to let everyone know he's in charge. Come to think of it, this timeline seems a lot like what would happen if the Antonines rather than the later Julio-Claudians had been the ones to set the tone for the Principate - a republican Principate, certainly, but one in which the first citizen is definitely first.

Thanks for your post. You make an interesting observation which I have to admit I didn't consider but it certainly makes sense.

I thought it was a little ironic that you had a Rufus accused of corrupt governorship in Cilicia.

You know I didn't even realise I had done that. I finished reading some of Cicero recently which probably explains it. Do you think it should be changed?

[Shogun]

I've left a few other clues in the timeline as well, but in regards to Britain yes it will be conquered by the Romans in TTL and Britannicus will have a large role to play in that.

How much of the island are we talking about? Do you mean about as much as the Romans conquered (and kept) as in OTL, with some sort of Hadrian's Wall (and on much the same alignment) marking the outpost of the empire there?

That's probably about the limit. My preference is for the Carpathians as they make a good frontier. In Dacia's case there is clear motivation and navigable rivers assist in communication. For Quadia there's probably less motivation in terms of native wealth - but the Tisza river would assist conquest and communication as well - there's no need to go beyond the Carpathians to the Dniester since it wouldn't be as good a frontier. There will be no conquest of Parthia or anything as grand as that in this timeline.


I'll be looking forward to the continuation of this timeline then. It will be interesting to see what the final shape of the Roman Empire will be here.

Also, concerning the religious/spiritual aspect, will there eventually be some sort of western version of Hinduism with a pantheon of gods and goddesses throughout the entire empire eventually melding into one coherent faith, like that sketched out in this thread (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=168757)?

Or are you going to go with the usual, conventional Christianization of the empire as in OTL?

[Nanwe]

You picked up on that well. I've left a few other clues in the timeline as well, but in regards to Britain yes it will be conquered by the Romans in TTL and Britannicus will have a large role to play in that.

I also wonder, much like Shogun if TTL Britannicus will conquer OTL Britannia or also the Pict lands known as Caledonia? I do believe that there'll be some sort of northern limes, and if not an agreement with a Pict strongman.

This is basically because Caledonia strikes me as too poor and cold for Romans to be interested in it and also the Romans were never good because of their military doctrine at engaging guerrillas in dense forests that cancelled the possibilities of their heavy infantry.

Well looking for other references the use of Divus Claudius pretty much tells me that there'll be an emperor named Claudius, perhaps not our OTL Claudius, tho.

That's probably about the limit. My preference is for the Carpathians as they make a good frontier. In Dacia's case there is clear motivation and navigable rivers assist in communication. For Quadia there's probably less motivation in terms of native wealth - but the Tisza river would assist conquest and communication as well - there's no need to go beyond the Carpathians to the Dniester since it wouldn't be as good a frontier. There will be no conquest of Parthia or anything as grand as that in this timeline.

So no Trajan expanding the Empire to its 117 AD maximum size? :(
At least Dacia will provide gold for the Empire.

[Shogun]

So no Trajan expanding the Empire to its 117 AD maximum size? :(
At least Dacia will provide gold for the Empire.

How did you conclude that from his post? I interpreted it as being that the entire frontier of the empire in that sector will in coming decades shift across the Danube to the Carpathian mountains, making the conquest much bigger than that of Trajan's in OTL. It won't be just Dacia being conquered, you know.

[Nanwe]

How did you conclude that from his post? I interpreted it as being that the entire frontier of the empire in that sector will in coming decades shift across the Danube to the Carpathian mountains, making the conquest much bigger than that of Trajan's in OTL. It won't be just Dacia being conquered, you know.

Well I didn't refer specifically to Dacia in the reference to Trajan, but rather to euromellow's allusion to the lack of a conquest of Parthia, which, Trajan OTL accomplished, albeit very short-lived and not actually total.

In fact since I am not too sure of where the Dniester ore Tisza are I couldn't comment on the borders in Eastern Europe.

[wannis]

Well I didn't refer specifically to Dacia in the reference to Trajan, but rather to euromellow's allusion to the lack of a conquest of Parthia, which, Trajan OTL accomplished, albeit very short-lived and not actually total.
"Not actually total" is a nice way of stating it - he conquered Mesopotamia, which sure was an important area, but still only part of the Parthian empire.

[Nanwe]

"Not actually total" is a nice way of stating it - he conquered Mesopotamia, which sure was an important area, but still only part of the Parthian empire.

Well iirc Ctesiphon was usually the Parthian capital, so while Trajan didn't conquer the entire Parthian Empire (lack of logistics, old age among other stuff), he did briefly conquer the the important areas of the western part of their major enemy, not a small feat, precisely.

In any case my views of Trajan are probably, terribly biased by both him being almost the only emperor aside from Augustus Spanish teachers care about and because of a TV cartoon based on Trajan times about a group of Roman adventurers who worked for him across the empire and beyond.

And now back to Drusus :P

[euromellows]

Hey thanks for all the interest. We might be getting ahead of ourselves to talk of future frontiers and all that. Whilst I have an outline of where this timeline will ultimately end up, I'm very much open to tweaking it as we proceed and as any research I came across indicate it won't work.

As for the religious aspect I have something planned for this which I hope will be interesting but also plausible. The first signs of which will become evident in a few more updates.

Edit: Next update is taking a little longer then expected. Real life has intervened to prevent its completion.

[Shogun]

Is your update ready yet?

[euromellows]

Tried something different with this update. Enjoy. (I will progressively go through and amend typos etc. Its a sunday afternoon and I'm tired...)

30 AD
In the consulship of Lucius Antistius Vetus and Gaius Cassius Longinus

The cool night air and wavering streaks of light conspired to suppress the concentration of one Tiberius Claudius Julius Caesar Germanicus. Claudius, for that was how most referred to him, let out an audible sigh, collapsing his head upon his hands in sheer frustration. He was seated most uncomfortably at a small writing table in the private study of his home. The flickering light of a terracotta lamp illuminated the greater part of the room suitable for his purposes, but always at the edges darkness teased its way forward, probing for a weakness in the light and threatening to overwhelm its temporary ascendance. His concentration and focus had long since dissipated and as a consequence Claudius had scarcely made any progress for at least the last hour. His eyes, riddled with the strain of fatigue, had become heavier which meant sleep would soon tempt him to abandon his efforts altogether.

Claudius was a relatively care free man. He had no reason to be otherwise. At 39 years of age he still retained the appearance of a youthful existence only marginally tempered by experience and time. He had aged remarkably well and his hair normally thick and clustered tightly, had only recently started showing signs of thinning. He could hardly be described as handsome, his figure far too spindly to ever possess the trappings of an athletic man, but nor was he ugly. His appearance so far from being exceptional was in almost every way ordinary. When standing he was tall and rose higher than most of his peers, though he could not claim to be a giant. Only his knees bore any resemblance of deformity, and he took great care to ensure they were always concealed from the probing eyes of the world.

It was not to his appearance that this man owed his care free nature, nor was it the keen intellect he possessed. It was almost entirely to the circumstances of his existence which were anything but ordinary. Claudius was a Roman, and like his peers could count himself amongst the most powerful society in the world. But even this wasn’t enough to set him apart from ordinary men. He was the youngest son of the reigning Roman Emperor and to that end found that he was someone of importance in society, someone listened to and someone respected. Because of it he possessed auctoritas, more than just authority it also carried implications of clout and pre-eminence separate to the holding of formal power.

His father, most commonly known as Drusus, had been Emperor for some 16 years. He succeeded the legendary Augustus, also his father-in-law, who had many years prior favoured Drusus as the second man in Rome and his designated successor. Drusus had done something most extraordinary after becoming Emperor. At the height of his career, and in the midst of unparalleled and unchallenged power, he restored the Republic. This was not an entirely unsurprising decision, for he had long foreshadowed such an intention even when in Augustus’ shadow. But it was all the more extraordinary because unlike many Romans who spoke of restoring the republic, Drusus actually did.

Except that he didn’t completely restore it. Not totally anyway. Under Augustus the forms and traditions of republicanism had existed under a careful fiction of preservation in the Emperor. Of course the extent that great man had dominated Rome was legendary and the Empire was a Monarchy in all but name during his reign. Rather than merely abolishing the Emperor and restoring the chaotic republican form completely, Drusus sought to reform it. He wished to regulate, not dominate the republic, and his reforms led to a formal Constitution which stripped the Emperor of many of his powers. It also stipulated the Emperor was an elected position, chosen solely by the Senate and elected for life. The practice of handing down the position to a chosen heir was abrogated with the return of power to the Senate.
In this context Drusus was an enormously popular figure with the Senate, and for Claudius this meant he was an ancillary beneficiary of good will. For though the son of an Emperor may be an important station in its own right, the son of a popular Emperor was infinitely more valuable. For those reasons Claudius led a most comfortable life.

Looking down at the parchment before him he studied its contents in detail, attempting in vain to distract himself from his musings. He was writing a history of the Roman conquest of Germania. It promised to be an intriguing read, perhaps the first of its kind, though Claudius conceded its subject was perhaps a little premature since that great land had not been fully subdued. His father had played a crucial role in the conquest, but it was true that it was incomplete. However for those lands which had not yet been pacified they were simply not of interest to Rome and consequently not of interest to the world.

He always preferred to do his writing at night. It was not necessarily the wisest choice devoid as it was of warmth and a particular sharpness of mind. Nonetheless at least he was guaranteed peace and quiet. There was nothing more frustrating than the interruptions of friends or family. Even the sound of scurrying slaves reflective of a busy household such as his was enough to distract him. Night was Claudius’ greatest protection from such disturbances, and he had long since learned it was the most productive time to produce his literary works. At least, that is, on most nights. Tonight was to be different for in the distance he could hear the gentle knockings on his front door and the rushing of slaves to answer it.

Picking himself up from the chair he stretched his muscles and awakened them from the confines of a deep and uncomfortable slumber. He gently combed his hair and adjusted his tunic, tugging slightly at the edges to hide the creases. Claudius let out a further sigh, if anything the visitor was a welcome distraction, since progress on his writings had been so scant. In an effort to awaken his faculties Claudius deigned to see what the fuss was and traced his way through the house towards the front door.

The household was quiet. There was no sign of life but for the steady steps of Claudius and the hushed voices from the front. He was fortunate, at least to his thinking, that he did not possess a large mansion too big for his taste. His villa, respectable in both size and presentation, possessed all the luxury he could ever want. It was entirely appropriate to both his station in life, and his ambitions.

Turning the corner he gazed down the hallway spying several of his slaves near the entrance in conversation with the visitor. The visitor was a tall man and well built, possessing a full head of greying hair neatly cut in the patrician fashion. His face carved a neat and almost handsome shape, and his nose bore two large nostrils on which two subdued green eyes rested. A distinctive and angular chin allowed Claudius to immediately recognise his guest as Marcus Antonious Memmius, one of his mother's men. Memmius was neither slave nor patrician, he was a freedman. He had given many years of loyal service to his mother's family and sixteen years ago on the accession of her husband as Emperor she had deigned to set him free. As a freedman he was still under obligations to his former master, but as a Roman citizen he enjoyed more privileges and the knowledge his children would not be slaves. Consequently his loyalty to the family had always been beyond reproach.

Further observation revealed the company of several others outside, probably slaves, holding torches and casting wary glances over their shoulders into the dark night beyond. Claudius pitied them, for the night was cold and he saw they were not all suitably dressed.

Memmius saw his approach and turned to address him, completely ignoring the door slaves. His face was etched with regret, his tone sombre. 'Salve Praetor Claudius Germanicus. Your mother sends for you.'
Claudius hesitated for a moment, wondering what on earth would get him sent for at this time of night. 'Ye Gods Memmius! Why now of all times?'
'It is your father. He has gotten worse.'
'Oh,' Replied Claudius. Of course that was the reason, how could he have forgotten! His father had, of late, been looking more frail and brittle. A few weeks back he had even collapsed in the Palace, causing Claudius' mother no end of fuss. But the last time Claudius saw him he had made a recovery and seemed normal. Admittedly it had been a few mornings ago but how much worse could it have gotten since then?

Interrupting his thoughts to interrogate Memmius further he asked, 'How bad is it?'
In truth he feared the answer since a midnight summons indicated the severity of the illness and this was far from a trivial visit.
'Very bad my lord. The doctors believe he will join the Gods this night.'

There was no need to hesitate any further. Claudius directed his slave to wake the other servants and to fetch his toga. Claudius lived on the Palatine and though the distance was not far he would take no chances. His father had always insisted any son of his wear a toga in public, no exceptions. Although it appeared his father was badly sick, he was still Emperor and Claudius would not disobey him even now.

Running to his room he gathered his things and had one of his slaves hurriedly drape the toga in place, careful to ensure the purple strip denoting his praetorian rank was clearly visible. Being an Emperor's son lent its own level of prestige, but in Claudius' opinion it was of small consequence next to his praetorship only recently gained in last year’s election. Although he had not figured prominently in that election, holding office as a magistrate of Rome was no small achievement and Claudius was especially proud since he was sure he had earnt the position himself. To his knowledge his father had directly intervened only once in his career, and that was to ensure his enrolment as a Senator, since it would be unbecoming for the Emperor’s son not to be one. Other than occasion Claudius had worked his way steadily through the various public offices on his own account. He was only sure and not certain because it was always difficult to gauge his father's considerable influence behind the scenes. It was probably why the Senate loved him so much. He never acted the tyrant and so far as everyone was concerned the republic had been restored if not completely then at least in substance. It was only in the shadows, or in the private meetings at the Palace, in which Drusus would influence events.

Claudius finished his dressing and returned to the entrance to join the party, three of his own men now amongst their number. With no more time to waste they departed and walked towards the Palace.

They did not have to walk long. Claudius lived on the Palatine Hill, an area only the wealthy and powerful congregated. Of the seven ancient hills of Rome it was the most prestigious, and the first Emperor Augustus had built his Palace in its vicinity. It was also the traditional location for the founding of Rome, where the twins Romulus and Remus were found by the wolf of the Tiber who nursed them to health. Only the very wealthy or influential could afford to live there. As the son of the Emperor Claudius was assured a place of residence, even if it was only a modest dwelling.

The district represented the tone of the Emperor's rule. If Drusus was a flamboyant man, prone to hosting wild and lavish parties then the streets in this part of the city may have been bustling with life even at this late hour. But Drusus was not such a man. He was sombre and entirely appropriate, and consequently the streets were practically deserted. Only in the distance could Claudius see signs of life, lit torches reminiscent of a squad of nightwatchmen on patrol. Only the Palatine had such a vigilant watch. The rest of Rome had varying degrees of protection afforded it on a sliding scale with the Palatine setting the highest standard. For the poor of Rome they were unlikely to spot even one patrol on a cold night.

The party passed the journey in silence. Even though their respective positions in society would normally forbid familiarity Claudius was not unapproachable to one such as Memmius. On the contrary Claudius was fond of Memmius and would often converse with him, so it wasn't on these grounds to explain the silence. It was simply a matter of collecting his thoughts and digesting the implications of his father’s death. It was a tragic event to be sure, not only for Claudius but also for the world.

Unfortunately Claudius couldn't claim any particular closeness with his father. Although he immensely respected his father, convinced as he was that no greater Roman had ever lived, the truth was that the two men were very different people. Where Claudius was fascinated by law and history - Drusus was always talking of the army and the great hardships he had suffered. According to Drusus a Roman was at his best when marching, building forts and smiting Rome’s enemies. Even at his old age Drusus would frequent the gymnasium and perform feats of strength. Drusus was a real Roman in every sense of the world - completely unlike his second son, who portrayed all the characteristics of a scholarly Greek!

Fortunately for his father Claudius had an elder brother on which to pin his hopes named Germanicus. Germanicus not only bore the name of the country his father had tamed, but also inherited the admirable characteristics and personality of his father and was a considerable source of pride. Undoubtably Claudius lived in his brother's shadow, but it was not something he begrudged. In fact he was quite close to his brother who had always treated him fairly despite his clear superiority.

Still, Claudius would always be grateful to his father for somewhat shielding him from the taunts of his mother and grandmother. As a young child Claudius exhibited signs of a serious affliction where he would stammer and shake uncontrollably. His mother evidently took this hard since she would refer to him as the monster and shun him from any affection or consideration she might otherwise have bestowed. His grandmother too, the late Empress Livia, was no kinder – subjecting him to cruel and painful mocking for most of his childhood. It was only later when he approached adulthood that the symptoms subsided and his family began to take notice of his considerable literary and oratorical talent. It had not prevented their intervention in arranging a ghastly marriage at a young age to one of Livia’s friends granddaughters. When the marriage ended in divorce his father had prevented their further interference in arranging a second marriage. Claudius would always be grateful to his father for that.

They arrived in short order at the Palace, originally constructed as the Domus Augusti, after the death of Augustus it passed to the State and become the property of the Emperor. Romans referred to it as the Imperial Palace ever since. It was remarkable more so for its modesty than anything else, not possessing the trappings of extravagance or holding pretensions to majestic sizes. It was an entirely Roman structure in both its design and its declaration.

Two short colonnades of polished stone beheld a party of vigilant guards at the entrance. Their resplendent uniforms the only hint of the majesty beheld within its walls. The Guards were a good mixture from several organisations - some were members of the Praetorian Guard, an elite part of the Roman Army. Others were members of the Batavi cohort, a group made exclusively of German tribesmen from the Upper Rhine region. Still more was a group of lictors who were not immediately obvious but Claudius knew they were around. As a Praetor Claudius was also entitled to six such guards, but their presence was only required during the day when on official business – they normally did not also guard at night, an exception only made for the Emperor. Officially lictors were professional attendants who walked ahead of their magistrate clearing a path for him with their fasces, a bundle of lashed rods together with an axehead. Unofficially the lictors served as a magistrate’s guard and a visible symbol of their status. In the days of the old republic the fasces did not include the axe, since Augustus that was no longer the case.

The assembled guards did not challenge Claudius. He was well known to them, not only as the son of the Emperor but also as a Senator and a Praetor! In any event Memmius was a servant of the household and permitted entry. Memmius no longer feigned to lead Claudius. Although strictly brought to the Empress under orders Claudius had always had free reign of the Palace and thus his strides carried him naturally, and of his own authority, into the private rooms of the Palace.

The room preceding his father's chambers was delicately presented. It was a comfortable setting with large couches presented in two parallel columns opposite one another along the walls. It was an unusual design. Claudius understood the design was inherited from Augustus, who had deigned that those waiting to petition him in his private chambers would be seated comfortably and in order. Claudius understood the idea had originated from his grandmother Livia, who had strongly influenced its presentation.

Entering the room Claudius saw immediately that he was beaten. Seated was his elder cousin Pannonicus and beside him his nephew Drusus Germanicus. The nephew wasn't an issue, but Pannonicus... Claudius didn't like him, never had. He was cruel, arrogant and worst of all possessed a sharp temper and imposing physique to go along with it. It was quite the disappointment that he was here first. He quickly nodded towards him in acknowledgement. His mother, Antonia, was also seated but on one of the opposite couches with her daughter in law Agrippina attending her. She hardly stirred at Memmius' approach, nor did she react at his announcement of Claudius.

Claudius could see the Empress Antonia had grown older. She was clothed in an unassuming cream dress, her greying hair tied tightly back with a single strand falling at the front. The last he saw her she had regained her colour and some of her sharp tongue. Never mind Claudius' steady climb up the cursus honorum or his gradual accumulation of prestige. She would never acknowledge it and had always found time to lash him with her cruel insults. Not anymore. Not since father had taken a turn for the worse. Now she wore the pained look of resignation.

'Claudius. Your father is not well. The doctors have been consulted and all agree. He is dying.' Her tone was neither comforting nor disparaging. She was either completely indifferent - which Claudius knew was not true, or she was in shock.
'Can I go to him?'
'Yes. It is good that at least one of his sons will see him. Livilla is with him at the moment but she has been quite long enough.'
Claudius winced at the mention of his sister Livilla. He didn't like her either. Equally cruel and tormenting as her despised husband Pannonicus. The only satisfaction Claudius gained from the situation was theirs was an infamously unhappy marriage. Served them right too, since they had tried so hard to make others miserable!

Preparing himself to enter Claudius adjusted his toga once again and straitened his hair. He was unsure entirely why but instinctively he knew he must always present his best before father.

He entered the bedchambers and saw his father lying sprawled on his back. Drusus’ eyes were closed and his right hand deeply massaged his skull, as if to relieve insurmountable pressure on his lobes. The pain must have been considerable for his breathing was heavy and laced with strain. He was talking softly, barely audible and clearly with difficulty. Livilla was seated on his left side and holding his empty hand.

She turned to see Claudius with a curious gaze. It was empty of the contempt he was normally accustomed to. It wasn't warmth either, but at least it lacked hostility.
'He is better now. He will be able to talk to you but he needs rest soon.'

The other person in the room, the Greek physician Aristonymus nodded his agreement. Aristonymus was his father’s favourite physician, despite being a Greek he was figured the best in Rome. It was good he was here. He kept himself in the back, inconspicuous and entirely appropriate - always ready to act if his services were required.

Claudius remained standing. If he was going to have his last conversation with his father then he would do it alone, and certainly not with the presence of his sister.

Livilla seemed to have understood, for she kissed Drusus' chin, gently combed his grey fringe and departed, leaving them in peace.
Claudius took the seat and held his father's hand. They felt strangely cold and the returned squeeze was weak and temporary. This illness truly had stripped his strength.

'Father it is good to see you.'
His father jerked up, almost to the point of opening his eyes but falling just short. 'Germanicus! You made it.' His voice became excited, a level of strength returning to his limbs. Clearly this had been the moment Drusus was waiting for.
Claudius swallowed the lump in his throat. He struggled to contain his disappointment - disappointment with himself for expecting anything more.
'No father it is Claudius.'
His father's spirit collapsed into itself again. The warmth retreated, the strength evaporated. Deprived of his motivation he slinked back into normality – once more perilously close to death.
'So he won't make it then...' He paused to rub his head more forcefully, relieving the pressure on his skull. Germanicus was presently Governor of Bohemia and it would be several weeks before he could return to Rome. There was an uncomfortable silence for a time, Claudius unsure what to say Drusus distracted by his pain.
Claudius' thoughts drifted, it was a terrible sight to behold. His father the great Emperor of Rome who had restored liberty to the State and who had tamed the ferocious Germans now lay reduced to such a weakened state. For all his powers and fame in the end he was only mortal, though he was very likely to be ordained a God on his passing. He hardly looked the image of a God now.
Suddenly his left arm shot out for Claudius' hand and squeezed it weakly. 'Claudius my son, you have done well.'
Claudius grimaced, certain it was an effort to pander to him, since he had only earlier been so disappointed with his presence.
'Claudius. Write well of me will you? In your histories.'
Claudius smiled. 'Of course father. You have restored the republic. There is no greater Roman.'
Drusus did not react other than to continue the massage of his scalp. He embraced a new role. He became the lecturing father, the dying and weakened man would be put off a little longer.
'Tell Germanicus to be wise and humble. He can be too arrogant sometimes.'
'Yes father.'
'And make sure he treats the Senate well. He will need a Senate that is respected.'
'Yes father.'
'But make sure he keeps an eye on them too! They need to balance each other. It can’t go back to the ways of Caesar or Marius.'
'Yes father.'
'And make sure he looks after the army. They are the backbone of the entire state. Guard them from ambitious men but do not empower them.'
'Yes father.'
Drusus paused for a moment, his tone become most serious and sincere. 'Claudius?'
'Yes?'
'Look after your brother. He will need your support.'
'Of course.' It was a genuine promise. Claudius legitimately had his brother’s best interests at heart and he would do his best to guide him, though he felt he wasn’t really needed.
'Claudius the most important is to remember the Constitution. It is everything. Without the rule of law Rome is nothing.'
Drusus' hands took a more fevered grasp of his own.
'Claudius promise me you will remember the constitution?'
'Of course father.'
'Good.' He withdrew his hand and sighed deeply. 'You will have to tell your brother for me. I can't keep going.' Drusus collapsed from the effort, his strain evidently unbearable. His breathing became more erratic and he took his hand from Claudius to rest both on his temples.
Claudius choked back his emotions to utter, 'I love you father.'
Drusus did not react, the pain becoming too immense. He murmured gently, 'I love you all Claudius.'

He began to sleep. Claudius knew he was near the end. It was unlikely Germanicus would make it in time, and so it would fall to him to advise his brother of their father’s last words. The physician approached the bed and felt Drusus' forehead gently. Claudius left the room feeling much worse than when he had gone in.

He spent a few moments to compose himself. The confrontation unsettled him far more than he had planned. Not for the first time did the finality of death confront him. Only six months earlier his grandmother had died. She had been larger than life too and even now her missing presence was surely felt. Claudius needed to speak to his mother and he managed to pull her aside and get her alone. To his surprise she treated him both seriously and respectfully.
'When was Germanicus sent for?'
'As soon as we could. Two days ago a priority courier was sent for your brother and for his son.'
Claudius nodded, it was good Nero was also coming. Calculating the distances Claudius worked out the message would be as far as Asculum by now, possibly it had already shipped to Illyrium. Assuming it had left on time it would arrive by sea at Aquileia in Illyria in three days. From there the courier would deliver the message to Boiodurum who would send it up the Vltava River to Boihaemum. Germanicus, if he wasn't out on patrol and located safely in the provincial capital, would probably get the message in just under two weeks. If he left straight away he could ride hard for Virunum and take the overland route back to Rome. All in all it would be 3 weeks and 2 days which would give him just enough time to secure the votes in the Senate. The election for a new Emperor would take place four market days after the death, roughly a month, and thus it was important Germanicus returned as soon as possible.

There was no other candidate with the appropriate prestige or authority who could prevail. Claudius was sure Germanicus would be a shoe-in. Still… there were no guarantees with the election. There was nothing to say Germanicus had to be in Rome to become Emperor. But this would be the first Imperial election to take place since Drusus' Constitution, and consequently it was better to leave nothing to chance.

The only other possible candidate who might pose a challenge was Uncle Tiberius, the Emperor's brother. It was unlikely given his advanced age, but there were many in Rome who still remembered a time when Tiberius was the favourite of Augustus. Furthermore his highly successful campaigns in Pannonia and Bohemia had brought great triumph to Rome and earnt him great honour. Fortunately Tiberius had largely withdrawn from public life in recent years and retired to a private villa on the island of Capri where salacious rumours held he lived a highly immoral lifestyle. Even more fortunately for Claudius, but Tiberius' only son Pannonicus was ineligible for succession - not yet having held the Consulship. The Constitution was quite specific on the requirements. Only a Senator of Consular rank was eligible for election.

'Who else knows?' He asked, worried about others thinking along the same lines as he.
Antonia merely shrugged. She was highly astute and knew the implications he referred to, she just didn't care as much as he did.
'It is only within the family at present. But this is Rome. It won't be long before news gets out. I expect half the Senate will turn out here in the morning.'
Claudius nodded. It was probably right. No matter how careful one was the news would get out anyway. This was too big. It might be as simple as the gossip of a slave to the bribing of a praetorian guard – the facts were going to get out and in the morning all of Rome would know about the Emperor's condition - if he survived that long.
His mother turned to him with an irritated look, evidently her patience with him having grown thin.
'Agrippina has already thought of all this. Your brother and nephew will be here as soon as they can and he will surely be elected Emperor. Now I must attend to the arrangements, the Vestal Virgins will need to be informed and no one has told poor Publius Cornelius yet.'

She dismissed him and parted company more abruptly then was necessary. Publius was the chief Pontiff behind Drusus. Inherent within the Emperor's position was that of Pontifex Maximus, the chief religious authority of Rome. The position was responsible for the religious upkeep of the city as well as the moral wellbeing of the city. It was this aspect which interested Drusus more than the other aspects. Most of the day to day administration was carried out by Publius Cornelius, who had demonstrated his competence many times. Drusus had always been careful to ensure the Pontiffs were men of proven integrity and in Publius Cornelius case he had chosen well.

Claudius looked about him. His sister in law Agrippina was talking with Livilla and her husband Pannonicus. Only young Drusus Germanicus remained seated. Claudius had always had a soft spot for the young man, seeing much of himself in the lad. Drusus the Younger, so he had come to be called, was the middle child of three boys. He was also completely in the shadow of his older brother, and displayed no interest in politics or campaigning. Completely unlike his father or his brother, he reminded Claudius very much of himself.

'Uncle Claudius.' He said respectfully as the older man approached.
'Salve Drusus. You do not look well.' It was true enough. The poor lad looked tired and emotional.
'It’s grandfather. He was always so kind to me. It’s going to be so different without him.'
Claudius sighed. The boy's words were echoes of his own feelings which he had been unable to speak.
'Yes it will. He has been Emperor for the best parts of my life. He will be greatly missed.'
The young man gazed up at his uncle with an inquisitive look.
'Was it like this with Divus Augustus uncle? Was everyone sad when he passed on?'
Claudius smiled at the formality of his nephew. Nobody in the family called Augustus by his divine name. That was only for the plebeians and the ordinary people. In any event Claudius recalled the events. He was only 20 when his adoptive grandfather had died but he remembered it well. His death was different to Drusus’ approaching demise. At the time his feelings were far more conflicted than they were now. Augustus had reigned for almost 40 years and his power was absolute. He had brought stability and peace to the Republic, but he had dominated it to such an extent that the primary feeling of many on his passing was what would happen now without him. Drusus was different. He had restored the Republic and returned genuine power to the Senate. His vaunted Constitutional reforms informed everybody of what would happen now – namely a formal election to establish the successor.
'Yes Drusus. Everyone was sad then too.' Was all Claudius managed in the end.
'What will happen now? Will father become Emperor?'
'Yes, I think that is most likely. Of course the Senate will need to meet to vote him in but I'm sure it will go to your father.'
'I guess that means I'll be like you Uncle Claudius. The younger son of the Emperor, not burdened with heavy expectations but prestigious enough to pursue any lifestyle I desire.'
Claudius laughed despite the atmosphere. 'Oh no Drusus you will still have expectations placed on you, particularly if your mother or grandmother have anything to say about it! Besides you’ve still got a younger brother who will need you guidance. But yes, you're right - you'll be cut a bit of slack.'
'Good,' Replied the youth, visibly at ease. 'I would hate to be Emperor.'

Claudius smiled and shook the youngster's hair. He entirely sympathised with his nephew. But one of the burdens of a younger and less popular brother was that he needed to do the necessary background work to support his elder. Germanicus was a shoe-in for election, but Claudius still wouldn't leave it to chance. He would hurry home and begin organising his own limited influence amongst the Senators to shore up support. He would begin writing immediately to his friends and invite some of the leading families to dine at his house, call in old favours on behalf of his brother. After all it was also in his own interests to have a grateful brother as the first man of Rome.

[wannis]

Well written.
I've always had a soft spot for Claudius, it's good to see that he seems more happy than IOTL, even if he doesn't become emperor ITTL.

[Velasco]

Two quick questions:

- Wouldn't he be called Tiberius Julius Caesar following Drusus' adoption? Or maybe inovate using Claudius as a first name.
- Likewise wouldn't Memmius be Antonius Memmius as a freedman of Antonia Minor?

Otherwise fantastic stuff. A family tree would definitely be appreciated :p

[Jonathan Edelstein]

Very nice. TTL's Claudius had a somewhat better childhood - which, I would presume, has made him more confident - and he's still a scholar. His close relationship with his brother will give him a great deal of power even if he doesn't become emperor himself, and he'll be a reformer because intellectuals who gain power can rarely resist the temptation to build utopias.

I wonder, though, whether the Senate would be willing to let the Julio-Claudian family retain the imperial title unchallenged. There are plenty of senators with consular rank, and some of them are ambitious; even after two generations of Julio-Claudian rule, I imagine that some would put themselves forward in the election and start politicking among their fellow senators for votes. If Germanicus doesn't get to Rome on time, and if the more-authoritative-but-still-naive Claudius is his sole surrogate at the election, I could imagine one or more of them posing a serious threat. On the other hand, the various senatorial candidates are unlikely to have broad-based support and may leave Germanicus as winner by default, especially if a simple plurality is enough to secure victory.

[Velasco]

Is the election of a new emperor an imperative? Maybe Claudiys and Tiberius get elected consuls until Germanicus is back home.

[ImperatorAlexander]

I feel that something is going to happen to Germanicus........

[Magnum]

I feel that something is going to happen to Germanicus........

yeah, me too. Very nice story btw.

[euromellows]

Thanks for the interest greatly appreciated. I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'm toying with continuing in this format and then reverting to the history book format. I enjoy both formats although the narrative takes me a lot longer.

Two quick questions:
- Wouldn't he be called Tiberius Julius Caesar following Drusus' adoption? Or maybe inovate using Claudius as a first name.
- Likewise wouldn't Memmius be Antonius Memmius as a freedman of Antonia Minor?
Otherwise fantastic stuff. A family tree would definitely be appreciated :p

Absolutely right. Thanks for spotting. My confusion with Claudius was that he titled himself Caesar and Augustus after his OTL accession. Of course in TTL as the son of the adopted Emperor Drusus this is irrelevant.

Is the election of a new emperor an imperative? Maybe Claudiys and Tiberius get elected consuls until Germanicus is back home.

Election of an Emperor takes place four market days after the death of the incumbent. This is roughly one month. Claudius is ineligible for Consul since he is currently serving as Praetor and therefore would need to wait at least a year. Tiberius has already held the consulship, as well as the tribunicia potestas and at one point was the successor to Tiberius. In this scenario he is an anomaly. Fortunately for Germanicus he is also very old by this point (70) and if his OTL character is anything to go by at that age he is uninterested in the job.

Very nice. TTL's Claudius had a somewhat better childhood - which, I would presume, has made him more confident - and he's still a scholar. His close relationship with his brother will give him a great deal of power even if he doesn't become emperor himself, and he'll be a reformer because intellectuals who gain power can rarely resist the temptation to build utopias.
I wonder, though, whether the Senate would be willing to let the Julio-Claudian family retain the imperial title unchallenged. There are plenty of senators with consular rank, and some of them are ambitious; even after two generations of Julio-Claudian rule, I imagine that some would put themselves forward in the election and start politicking among their fellow senators for votes. If Germanicus doesn't get to Rome on time, and if the more-authoritative-but-still-naive Claudius is his sole surrogate at the election, I could imagine one or more of them posing a serious threat. On the other hand, the various senatorial candidates are unlikely to have broad-based support and may leave Germanicus as winner by default, especially if a simple plurality is enough to secure victory.

Indeed Claudius has experienced a better life. He has also been allowed to pursue his own path through the cursus. As to the Senate willing to let the Julio-Claudian family retain the title, I think that for now it will remain the case. But yes, over time it will most certainly be up for grabs. Germanicus possesses considerable clout in this scenario and is the best candidate. He will also inherit his father's considerable clientele network. A supermajority is required for the candidate (2/3's), which ensures long term that the emergent candidate has strong broad based support. Although this will not always be the case (I used the Papal model as inspiration which had its OTL problems as well).

I feel that something is going to happen to Germanicus........

Something will happen to him. But not just yet. ;)

P.S: Magnum have you abandoned your excellent 1204 timeline? I see it hasn't been updated in some time.

[Magnum]

P.S: Magnum have you abandoned your excellent 1204 timeline? I see it hasn't been updated in some time.

wow, I must say that I am honestly touched by this. I can't believe somone actually remebered it.

I did give up on it, hoping to get back to it some time in the future, and then gave up for good.

You sir, however, have inspired me. I hearby promise to get back to it ASAP.

[Space Oddity]

He's still married to the highly dangerous Agrippina, correct?

[Nanwe]

He's still married to the highly dangerous Agrippina, correct?

Unless euromellows refers to a different one, Agrippina is Claudius' daughter-in-law, not his wife.

[isabella]

He's still married to the highly dangerous Agrippina, correct?

Agrippina is not so dangerous with her husband alive and well...
(and the worst Agrippina the mother of Nero, Agrippina the Younger aka Germanicus and Agrippina's eldest daughter)

[isabella]

Unless euromellows refers to a different one, Agrippina is Claudius' daughter-in-law, not his wife.
Claudius' sister-in-law or Drusus' daughter in law maybe, being wife of Germanicus (son of Emperor Drusus and brother of Claudius)

And the other Agrippina (OTL Claudius' last wife was the daughter of this Agrippina and Germanicus and Claudius niece)

[Space Oddity]

Agrippina is not so dangerous with her husband alive and well...
(and the worst Agrippina the mother of Nero, Agrippina the Younger aka Germanicus and Agrippina's eldest daughter)

Ehhhh...

I'm not so sure about that. If we take her actions OTL as a model... then the Republic* could be in for some interesting times...

Unless euromellows refers to a different one, Agrippina is Claudius' daughter-in-law, not his wife.

The "He" I was referring to was Germanicus...

[euromellows]

He's still married to the highly dangerous Agrippina, correct?

Germanicus is still married to Agrippina. She's less dangerous in TTL with her husband in ascendance, but she will play a prominent role in coming updates and will certainly make Germanicus' reign uncomfortable.

[Shogun]

When's the next update?

[euromellows]

Thanks for the continued interest Shogo. I am working on it. Ideally I'd like to post it by Sunday but it might even be another week off.

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Augustus Empire)

"At the death of Drusus everybody was deeply grieved. He was a man of the most striking physical beauty and likewise of the noblest spirit, and was conspicuous alike for his culture and for his strength. Though as a Caesar he had the greatest power, he kept his powers on the same plane as his Senatorial colleagues and in an act of immortal generosity restored to the Senate its ancient authority and power. He never conducted himself oppressively toward his subjects or with jealousy toward them in anyway. In a word, he was one of the few men of all time who have neither sinned against the fortune allotted to them nor been destroyed by it."-Cassius Dio. Histories (57) [1]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_liui6ohGhS1qc6peio1_500.jpg

The ailment of Drusus, his passing and the great funeral which attended his august existence.

Drusus' reign, while not nearly as long as Augustus, ultimately culminated in nearly 16 years since his accession in 14 A.D. During that time the Empire had largely been at peace and Drusus' reign went virtually unchallenged. We have seen how he carefully operated behind the scenes to protect the fabric of his Constitution. In the early years of his leadership the Constitution was largely seen as his document and his vision for Rome, but in only a few short years into its operations the Constitution was embraced by the majority of Rome with popular acclaim. Its ultimate champion, Drusus, maintained an intense interest in ensuring it was upheld and so it was that he never took any overt action to render it ineffective. This approach would earn Drusus overwhelming praise from both his contemporaries and from posterity.

Some five months before Drusus' own death his elderly mother, the former Empress Livia Augusta, passed on after a long bout of illness. Livia had lived an extraordinary life and at the age of 86 was possibly the oldest person in Rome at the time of her death. Despite the death of her husband Augustus in 14 A.D. her public profile had hardly diminished. She was a popular figure and though never holding real power, her authority as both the wife of the first Emperor and the mother of the current Emperor was immense. In particular she was seen as a role model for Roman women wives, mothers and even grandmothers found her a compelling example to follow in their own lives. Her relationship with Drusus and his wife, the new Empress Antonia, proved to be friendly and she took a keen interest in the upbringing of her grandchildren and even great-grandchildren.

Towards the end of her life Livia began to take on an extra celebrity, the historian Tacitus recording that various travellers to Rome would be desperate to spy a glance of her as the last person of substance from the Civil Wars. It is understood that Livia enjoyed this celebrity and ensured she was active in attending the theatres in public view until only ill health prevented her.

At the beginning of Drusus' reign the Senate awarded the title of Pater Patriae (father of the Country) to Augustus and also the unprecedented title of Mater Patriae (mother of the Country) to Livia. Drusus had vetoed the awarding of this title to himself, setting a precedent for reigning Emperors to award the title only after their death. However because of this action in years to come it would be customary to award the title to the Emperor's Consort if she survived her husband (except famously in the case of Mania Papiria Aquilina who was supposed to have committed numerous affairs).

When Livia finally did pass on Drusus voted her an incredible honour, ensuring her deification as Diva Augusta. It was this act which lead future historians to allege Livia had acted from an early age to ensure the ascendance of her son, even to the point of murdering any rivals. However despite the enduring popularity amongst some threatrical traditions there is no evidence to support these allegations and most historians do not support them.

It is understood that Drusus offered his elder brother Tiberius a place of honour in the funeral, which the historian Lucius Pansa described as "memorable". Tiberius and Livia had experienced strained relations for many years and Tiberius' retirement to a private villa on the island of Capri was rumoured to be because he could no longer endure her. In any event Tiberius was not present at her funeral and instead Drusus gave the funeral oration himself.

It is an enduring romantic myth that the passing of Livia caused Drusus a great deal of strain which impeded his own health and eventually lead to his death. However this is not the case. Drusus is recorded as having always lead an active life, even in old age where most Romans had retired or slowed down Drusus, studiously continued his exacting fitness regime. This was often against the wishes of his family and the advice of his Greek physician Aristonymus who advised the aging Emperor to decrease his physical exertions. Some months after Livia's death Drusus is reported to have seemingly collapsed suddenly while taking a turn in the Imperial gardens. Evidently this was not the first incident, for some weeks prior Drusus had begun experiencing difficulty with his memory. The decline of Drusus was faithfully recorded by his son Claudius, who described a worrying incident some weeks before his collapse:

"The first signs of his illness were publicly revealed when the Emperor, upon addressing the coming years elected Plebiean Tribunes, began having difficulty relating an incident he wished to pronounce. An uncomfortable moment erupted when, after a period of struggling silence, a Tribune offered to assist and the Emperor became angry and exploded in a fury of frustration. The Tribunes were summarily dismissed and the Emperor spent the afternoon in a deep rage, condemning his memory and frustrated immensely at the decline of his faculties." -Divus Claudius. Hisoria Romana (12.8) [2]

This incident marked a turning point for Drusus who began to reduce his exertions and limit his appearances in the Senate. The transformation happened relatively quickly for Drusus began to look more frail and less able. He was still somewhat in command of his faculties, but he continued to be plagued with memory loss at inopportune times. The truth of his condition was withheld by the Empress, who sought to treat it privately and for a time her efforts seemed successful. Drusus' recovery after his fall was temporary, lasting only a few weeks. His memory had not returned and soon enough he was unable to rise from bed. His decline by now was inevitable and a desperate effort was expended to recall Germanicus from Boihemum where he was, fortune would have it, finishing his term as Governor. Drusus managed to linger for another few days where his family was gathered to the Palace to say goodbye. Contrary to all expectations Drusus lingered on until 6 February 30 A.D., some three weeks after his 68th birthday.

The modern diagnosis of Drusus' condition has generally been contended to be Gliobastoma multiforme, an aggressive form of malignant brain tumour with an extremely poor prognosis. Medical specialists have speculated that Drusus' condition may have been known to himself for as much as 12 months before his decline was publicly revealed. His contemporaries believed it was a result of his strenuous physical activity but modern medical specialists have refuted this.

Drusus' legacy

Excepting perhaps Julius Caesar and Manius Sulpicius, few historical Roman figures can claim to have such an important place in the consciousness of everyday Romans. The legacy of Drusus' constitutional reforms are enormous and arguably amongst the most important of all Roman achievements. While the Constitution of that era has not survived entirely intact its impact has not diminished to this day despite the great passage of time. Drusus' Constitution did not entirely remove the danger of an autocratic Emperor, but what it did do was ensure the great importance the Senate continued to play in society. The Civil Wars of the 3rd century demonstrate that no Emperor, no matter how autocratic, could ever ignore the Senate and those that attempted to do so found themselves isolated and deposed. Future Civil Wars typically involved competing Senatorial factions with an individual figurehead as leader, it was rare for it to be the other way around.

Although the Constitution can rightly be regarded as Drusus' crowning achievement, it is important not to overlook his other accomplishments. Drusus was also an accomplished administrator in his own right, and his largely behind the scenes leadership allowed the State to resume a sense of normality particularly in the early years of the Constitution. As Emperor he dealt fairly and justly with all client states and rebellions were uncommon during his reign, although as we have seen even Drusus was not immune to this. The Empire did not expand territorially during his reign and he ensured that public expenses were kept to a minimum. Under the restored republic the holding of festivals and games was largely the purview of the various magistracies, mostly financed by the individual concerned (with some exceptions). Clearly this arrangement benefitted the public purse, and on Drusus' passing the treasury was stated to have an enormous sum of 1,900,000,000 sesterces. Although an impressive figure, this sum would later illicit a false sense of prosperity and lead the Emperor Germanicus into an expensive war.

Drusus is also an unusual Emperor in that his reputation has survived undiminished throughout the centuries. Within Roman Christianity he is one of the more popular Saints and has been unofficially adopted as the Patron Saint of Politicians - his inspired leadership providing a worthy example of any aspirants entering that field. In Rome his statue guards the entrance to the steps of the modern Senate House and even in Germania his legacy continues to be celebrated. Drusus finished only one book the De fundamentis rei publicae (The Fundamentals of the Republic), which among explaining the objectives of the Constitution also serves as an important reflection of public life and duty.

Drusus' funeral was a magnificent affair which rivalled that of his predecessor Augustus. Always holding his military career in high affection his funeral had members of the elite Praetorian Guard circle his funeral pyre in the traditional military funeral fashion. His eldest son Germanicus paid homage to his father's character and his leadership and he was immediately deified by the Senate as Divus Drusus, and voted posthumously the title Pater Patriae (with his widow being also voted Mater Patriae). Both Germanicus and Claudius stated that Drusus was the very greatest of the Romans, and pledged to uphold the values of the restored republic. The Senate lamented the passing of the man who had restored their libertas, and celebrated the 6 February 30 A.D. as the day of Drusus.

Drusus was survived by his wife and three children, as well as his eight grand-children and his elder brother Tiberius. His son Germanicus arrived in Rome to contest the first Principate elections as prescribed by the Constitution. Germanicus' own ascension came days after the official funeral and was largely a foregone conclusion (Tiberius, the only other potential claimant with enough prestige, did not contest the election). The death of Drusus ended an important era in Roman history, but his passing also signalled a new beginning where his successor would have one of the more colourful and dramatic reigns which would end in terrible tragedy.

-----
[1] An amended version of Cassius Dio's recording of the death of Germanicus.
[2] TTL Quotation

[TaylorS]

Isn't Glioblastoma the same kind of brain cancer that killed Ted Kennedy? :(

RIP, Drusus.

[PlayerOne]

Damn, Chrsitianity survives? That feel when you will never live in a world that worships a Roman Emperor...

[Shogun]

Damn, Chrsitianity survives? That feel when you will never live in a world that worships a Roman Emperor...

Hopefully that only means that Christianity is one of many faiths within the Empire existing alongside the broader umbrella of what will evolve to become western Hinduism.

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter V – Rebirth and Interauctoritas (Augustus’ Empire)
....
However because of this action in years to come it would be customary to award the title to the Emperor's Consort if she survived her husband (except famously in the case of Mania Papirius Aquilinus who was supposed to have committed numerous affairs).

When Livia finally did pass on Drusus voted her an incredible honour, ensuring her deification as Divus Augusta.
Gender!!!!
Probably 'Mania Papiria Aquilina'
Certainly 'Diva Augusta'.

[Sian]

very interesting TL ... following

[euromellows]

Isn't Glioblastoma the same kind of brain cancer that killed Ted Kennedy? :(
RIP, Drusus.

I'm not sure about Ted Kennedy. It's a terribly aggressive form which I've had the misfortune of witnessing. The symptons I described earlier for Drusus are sadly from my own observations. It was amazing how quickly the condition deteriorated after the diagnosis, although anecdotally the doctors believe the symptons may have first appeared up to 12 months before.

Damn, Chrsitianity survives? That feel when you will never live in a world that worships a Roman Emperor...

Christianity does survive but in a very different form.

Hopefully that only means that Christianity is one of many faiths within the Empire existing alongside the broader umbrella of what will evolve to become western Hinduism.

This is reasonably close to how it would transpire. With the centre of power remaining firmly with the Senate the dynamics of Christianity's interaction with the Government change. Historically the Senate was the most conservative of the Roman establishment when dealing with the new religion and only with a very serious compromise could an agreement be reached. I have a means of achieving this which sadly is centuries away, but the first butterfly concerning Christ will be apparent in the next few updates.

Gender!!!!
Probably 'Mania Papiria Aquilina'
Certainly 'Diva Augusta'.

Thanks Dathi. I have changed. I'm grateful for your advice here and am not too proud to admit my significant shortcomings here.

very interesting TL ... following

Thanks Sian. I appreciate the interest.

[wannis]

Christianity does survive but in a very different form.
It must be very different if a pagan emperor can become a saint...

[Incognitia]

It must be very different if a pagan emperor can become a saint...

It must be pretty different if it's going to survive for very long in an Empire that isn't converting to it wholesale. The exclusivism is going to have to go, or Christians will be seen as "those dangerous nutters who can't get along with anyone else."

[Nanwe]

It must be very different if a pagan emperor can become a saint...

Well iirc some very decent emperors like Trajan were upheld by Christian theologians as a "virtuous pagan". If this Christinity is the result of dealing between the archpagan Senate and Christian leaders it is not so far fetched.

[TaylorS]

I'm not sure about Ted Kennedy. It's a terribly aggressive form which I've had the misfortune of witnessing. The symptons I described earlier for Drusus are sadly from my own observations. It was amazing how quickly the condition deteriorated after the diagnosis, although anecdotally the doctors believe the symptons may have first appeared up to 12 months before.I know Teddy's cancer was derived from the brain's glial "support" cells, but I don't know if that is the only kind of glial cell cancer or if there are several kinds.

Pancreatic cancer is even worse, you can get diagnosed and you will be dead 2 weeks later, that is what happened to my stepdad. :(

[RPW@Cy]

It must be very different if a pagan emperor can become a saint...

Maybe ATL Christianity adopts a doctrine of posthumous baptism similar to the OTL Mormons? Once he's baptised, there should be no real obstacle in the way of canonisation.

Why the church would want to baptise him is a different question, of course. Maybe his constitution is crediting with preventing a wave of official persecution or something?

[Superwes]

Buuuuuump.

[Libertad]

This is so, so, so COOL! :cool:

[euromellows]

Thanks for the posts. I haven't abandoned this timeline, but clearly progress has been slower than normal. Work is particularly busy at this time of year, but with the holidays starting soon I anticipate I'll have an update before the end of the year. It will deal with the turbulent reign of Germanicus and the beginning of the POD concerning Christianity will be revealed as well (although its importance isn't immediately apparent for some decades).

[Libertad]

1. Roman Industrial Revolution (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=143444)
2. Industrialized Rome (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=263572)
3. WI Roman and Chinese Industrial Revolution? (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=241726)
4. Effects of a Roman Industrial Revolution (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=158145)
5. Industrial Revolution in Rome? (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=30077)
6. Ave Imperator! A Roman Printing Press and Industrial Revolution (http://alternatehistory.org/discussion/showthread.php?t=183134)
7. Another Roman Industrial Revolution (http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Roman_Industrial_Revolution)
8. Industrial Age Rome (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=122310)
9. Roman Empire (Superpowers) (http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Roman_Empire_%28Superpowers%29)
10. Industrial Revolution in the Roman Empire (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=106711)
11. The non-fall of the Roman Empire (http://io9.com/5556596/great-moments-in-alternate-history-the-non+fall-of-roman-empire)
12. Industrial Revolution in Ancient Greece (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=97099)
13. Ancient Printing Press (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=258766)
14. Hero's steam engine (http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=57307)

All are in terms of making Ancient Rome/Greece enter some kind of an industrial age. Full blown timelines, however ASB, or inquiries about its plausibility.

I don't really advocate it for it. But a proto-industrial era could be possible.


15. Isaac's Empire v.1 (http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=93323)
16. Isaac's Empire v. 2 (http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=216551)

Byzantine Rome escaping Manzikert and the Crusades and moved on to become the preeminent global power. Now on its retconned version.

After all, the Roman Empire really lasted until 1453 for me. And this is if you're going to make Rome have Germanic invaders and reduce it to its eastern territories, plus Italy, or even without it.


Suggestions:

1. I'm suggesting something inspired by the Isaac's Empire TL's democratic system instituted by some Emperor in its first version... regional assemblies with devolved powers from the Roman Senate, Tetrarchy of this form... as some growth of the idea of representative democracy if all provincials would be granted full citizenship in the future. I don't suggest super-governors coming from these assemblies though. It would be a dangerous precedent, I'm sure people in power would realize that.

2. Explore the ideas given by the authors of the industrial revolution timelines. I particularly like the alternate printing press. That might be enough. But a steampunk Rome might be way, way far yet.


I also just want to comment upon my own exploration of the idea of an alternate Drususian reforms in my mind way back, but I'm not thinking of your Drusus though. I'm thinking of butterflying away the 1st century civil wars by having the popular tribune Drusus back around 90 BC, whose OTL assassination sparked the Italian Social War and the rise of Sulla, do these kinds of reforms, ALMOST the same as what you've done here. Whahaha!

That's why you've really done a very cool timeline for me. GREAT JOB!

[Libertad]

Aetas Ab Brian (http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/History_of_Rome-After_%C3%86tas_ab_Brian_(%C3%86tas_ab_Brian))

An ASB TL involving two men that came to the past and kept Rome intact as a consequence.

[Shogun]

Still waiting for the next installment....

[ImperatorAlexander]

Its been almost two months! I want more :)

[euromellows]

Excerpt from The History of the Roman State
Chapter VI The Republican Principate

“His was a character of exceptional honesty and justice. His pursuit of corruption and abuse of power was legendary and overwhelmingly popular. Never did a more just and honourable man exist in the history of Rome and the republic. Yet his greatest fault was the craving of public attention and acclamation. He assumed too eagerly the role of protector of the people and his endless pursuit of fame and recognition set him many enemies in the Senate. He assumed his own supreme faith in his abilities was shared universally by his Senatorial colleagues and he trusted, perhaps naively, to their own honourable conduct. In the end he failed to appreciate the ferocious means to which his opponents would descend, and after accumulating too many vices, his reign was tragically cut short by a licentious conspiracy of charlatans and demagogues.” –Gnaeus Proculus. Leaders of Rome. 5.7

http://oi46.tinypic.com/afikvp.jpg

The ascendance of Germanicus – His homage to Augustus and Drusus – His enormous popularity and the beginning of his reign

Germanicus’ ascension represents the end of the Augustan-Drusan age. While Augustus is considered to be the first true Roman Emperor, Germanicus was the first Emperor elected under the auspices of the Constitution. This represented a clear break from the unique nature of Augustus’ and even Drusus’ reign since, although following the spirit of the Constitution, Drusus was never actually elected as Emperor. Germanicus on the other hand was elected Emperor unanimously by the Senate since he had no opponent to face him. Undoubtedly this was a wise move for his contemporaries since no other candidate would be likely to accumulate the necessary votes. Germanicus was immensely popular with the people and it was said that everyone in Rome could name all six of his children. The only other possible candidate, his uncle Tiberius, was already very old by this point and had largely withdrawn from public life.

Despite the high level of support Germanicus enjoyed within the Senate, there was some disquiet immediately prior to the election which presciently set the tone for his reign. As has already been observed, Germanicus was completing his term as Governor for the Boihemeum province when his father became gravely ill. While Germanicus ultimately returned to Rome in time to contest the election, evidently there was some concern amongst his family that this might not be the case and his wife Agrippina was accused of orchestrating a political stunt which earned the ire of the Senate. According to a number of sources, Agrippina allegedly spread the rumour amongst the poor Subura precinct that the Senate was not going to vote for Germanicus as Emperor and pick somebody else as their candidate. The resultant riot caused much violence in the city and it was only after a bloody suppression by the Urban Cohorts and Praetorian Guard that order was restored. The incident was seen by many as a deliberately provocative message to the Senate that only Germanicus had the support of the people.

According to Germanicus’ brother Claudius, also a Senator and present in Rome at the time, the attempt to influence the vote was complete overkill and totally unnecessary. Germanicus was the clear front runner candidate in any event and the high handed intervention actually detracted support within the Senate. Although Germanicus himself would later claim to have had no knowledge of the plot, many Senators didn’t believe him and it would continue to be a popular rumour his opponents would cite against him throughout his reign.

In any case, the incident did not prevent his election and Germanicus enjoyed broad based support from amongst all the classes of Rome. On his ascension he paid appropriate homage to his predecessors, both Augustus and Drusus. His admiration for both men was genuine, particularly in the case of his father, who he credited with having not only restoring the republic but also having provided security for Rome by securing Germania. In honour of his late father, and also to celebrate his own ascension, Germanicus announced generous games for the entire month of February costing an estimated 200,000 denarii ($3.7 million). The games were a major success and Germanicus cemented his enormous popularity with the plebeians which would remain throughout the entirety of his leadership.

The Empire under Germanicus - Of his great honesty and morality - His refusal to favour his sons – The endless pursuit of justice and the prosecutions for the perpetration of misery

At the beginning of his reign Germanicus announced to the Senate that he intended to respect the Constitution and follow the model established by his father to protect its role in the republic. While this was largely true there were a number of key differences between that of his father and Germanicus. Drusus had always been careful to operate largely behind the scenes and rarely involved himself in the day to day running of the Senate, preferring to use others to speak in favour of (or against) a particular policy or legislative action. In this way he was able to ‘rise above’ the contemporary politics and portray himself as a classical constitutional monarch.

Germanicus on the other hand held no such compunctions and, though still acting legally within the confines of the Constitution, he was a far more active agent of Senatorial politics than his predecessor. As Emperor he took on a more lively role in the Senate, arguing against measures which did not meet his favour, supporting those measures which did. Though he did not need to resort to using his Senatorial veto, not all members of the Senate viewed the direct intervention fondly as recorded faithfully by the senator Lucretius Fuscianus in a letter to his brother:

“It was an altogether unsettling spectacle and ultimately self defeating. Germanicus’ speeches on the Senate floor were worthy and powerful, but their frequency detracted the power the Princeps’ words once held. In contrast Drusus spoke so rarely on matters of State that his speeches became so much more effective because of their reserved nature. How powerful the man is who says so little!” –Lucretius Fuscianus. Private correspondence dated 33 - 39 A.D.

Still, despite the more direct approach Germanicus’ character was highly regarded. He was described as scrupulously fair in his dealings, and took a very stern view of corruption and abuse of power. His clients saw him as a fair and balanced master who was attentive to their needs. He rewarded loyalty with loyalty but not blindly so since he earned a reputation for not promoting people beyond their competency or their station.

Regarding his family Germanicus was also famous for not favouring his sons excessively in the early years of his reign. In particular he was known to be firm with his eldest, Nero, with whom he placed many hopes for the future. Nero’s sudden death in 34 A.D. came as a shock to the family, particularly Agrippina who harboured serious ambitions for him. Nero was Governor of Germania at the time of his death, and in the middle of overseeing the building of a road fell from his horse. Nero had shown considerable talent in public office and there was every expectation that he would be a worthy heir for Germanicus when the time was right. Although married, Nero had not borne any children and this fact may have pressured Agrippina to marry off her other two sons Drusus the Younger and Gaius Caligula. After Nero’s death Germanicus also began to take more of an active interest in the political careers of his remaining sons and showed them more favour then before. It was a position he felt uncomfortable with since he always felt his own rise had been driven largely by his own talents. According to his brother Claudius, Germanicus didn’t perceive any talent in his second son Drusus the Younger. Claudius would also later allege that Germanicus never approved of Caligula’s morality, but this is harder to quantify since the first signs of Caligula’s madness were not apparent until after Germanicus died.

With regard to Germanicus’ regulation of the Senate, he saw his role as balancing the excesses of the Senate with the tyranny of democracy. To that end whenever accusations of corruption reached him he would ensure the matter was properly investigated and prosecute those responsible. However in contrast to Drusus, Germanicus would often prosecute the individual himself rather than leave it to another Senator as Drusus had. In all likelihood those prosecuted were indeed corrupt, but in handling the prosecution himself Germanicus demeaned his stature in the Senate – even though such prosecutions were immensely popular with the ordinary citizens of Rome. The most famous example of this occurred with the dismissal of Annius Vinicianus, which produced a constitutional crisis when it occurred.

Annius Vinicianus was a Senator of Consular rank who had served as Consul in 29 A.D. He was an enormously wealthy Senator and had a reputation for greed and gluttony. In the fourth year of Germanicus’ reign, Vinicianus was serving a term as Governor of Asia when Germanicus decided to tour the provinces. Germanicus’ arrival in Asia was a big event, but unfortunately for Vinicianus a number of reports had reached Germanicus which indicated Vinicianus had engaged in fraudulent and corrupt behaviour during his term. Germanicus allegedly witnessed the effects of this first hand, and entered into a bitter dispute with Vinicianus during his stay. As Asia was a Senatorial province Germanicus was unable to legally interfere and would need to refer Vinicianus to the Senate after the expiration of his term. However Vinicianus’ conduct so offended Germanicus that he decided, in his capacity as Censor, to remove Vinicianus from the Senatorial order and thus by implication deprive Vinicianus of his Governorship. This move was highly controversial since its legality was called into question. Although the removal of Vinicianus as a Senator was certainly within Germanicus’ power, the stripping of his authority as Governor was less obvious since it was the Senate which had appointed him.

Vinicianius’ Quaestor became the Acting Governor of Asia during this time and Germanicus was careful not to interfere in the running of Asia himself. He tried to paint his actions as being in accordance with the Constitution, but the damage was done. Vinicianus was an influential Senator with many supporters and his removal without trial was considered heavy handed by many in the Senate. Even moderate Senators who would agree Vinicianus was badly corrupt were shocked by the move. Germanicus’ brother Claudius, by now a Senator of Consular rank and generally regarded as the leader of the Imperial faction in the Senate, did his best to weather the damage and defend his brother. Claudius wrote to Germanicus requesting his urgent return to Rome to conduct a proper trial of Vinicianus before the Senate to mitigate the political damage.

When Germanicus finally did return to Rome with Vinicianus he immediately convened a trial to oversee the prosecution. Despite having stripped Vinicianus of his Senatorial rank, Claudius was able to persuade his brother to conduct the trial in the Senate since it would give retrospective approval to his contentious actions in Asia. Although Germanicus recognised the controversy, he continued to maintain his actions had been entirely legal since he had not officially removed Vinicianus as Governor only as a Senator. His argument remained that Vinicianus technically vacated the office since it was impossible for a non-Senator to be a Governor. The argument was a complex matter of legal interpretation and although the Senate ultimately sided with Germanicus as having the correct interpretation, the incident badly damaged his credibility and authority.

Despite Germanicus’ role as the people’s champion he was still careful not to prosecute Vinicianus publicly. One of the important aspects of the Roman Constitution at that time was the various privileges afforded to Senators, including the right to only be tried before their peers. Although Germanicus evidently enjoyed his fame as a fearless defender of justice, he had no wish to denigrate the Senatorial station and after concluding the trial Vinicianus was sent into exile from Italia but retained his citizenship and possessions. This would later prove to be a significant oversight and was very typical of Germanicus’ reign. He would always act with restraint and cultivate the image of a fair and impartial judge. However in this case it could be argued Germanicus would have been well served acting the tyrant, since his restraint would ultimately lead to ruin.

But perhaps more significant then this was Germanicus' disastrous military campaign to finally subjugate in full the country bearing his name. This campaign of Germanicus was short and although he did not suffer any major military defeats, arguably the war was a ruinous enterprise which lead directly to his downfall.

------
Authors Note:

I promised to update before the end of the year and so I have. Unfortunately I had intended to complete the reign of Germanicus in one full post which would include the short war in Germania Ulterior (OTL Germania Magna), his downfall from power and touch briefly on the origins of Christianity. However I found I did not have the time to complete it all in time for 2013, so I hope this update will suffice for now. I will try to get the next update completed next week.

Please note that my characterisation of Germanicus may not be shared by everyone. I remember reading David Shotter's book on Augustus and saw references to Germanicus' arrogance and the playing up of his likeness to Alexander the Great. In my opinion part of the reason why Germanicus was so overwhelming popular in OTL was that he simply was not Tiberius. I also thought it would be interesting to not have everything always go Rome's way. Here Germanicus is a competent Emperor, but he has misread his role as being far too public and not keeping the Senate on side. He also is not a tyrant which, as already pointed out, would actually have preserved him longer. In many ways he resembles Caesar after he was appointed dictator for life.

Have a Happy New Year!

[wannis]

Great Update! Felicem Novum Annum!

[Libertad]

Did you see the references I gave to you? Hopefully, they would be of some use for your great timeline. :D

[ImperatorAlexander]

Must have missed this update first time round, good to see that this is back!

[euromellows]

Thanks for the comments. Progress will continue to be slow but I won't abandon the timeline. My wife has put her foot down and insisted I finish one project at a time with a view to publishing this year. As progress is further advanced on this project I've had to take this one slow.

Did you see the references I gave to you? Hopefully, they would be of some use for your great timeline. :D

I did see the references. Thank you for providing the list. I've read many of those posts before and they're a great resource.

[Shogun]

Any more updates?

[slydessertfox]

I've been following this since the beginning. It's amazing. Keep up the good work!

[Cyrus Alquist]

This timeline is beyond wonderful. Well done, good sir!


However in this case it could be argued Germanicus would have been well served acting the tyrant, since his restraint would ultimately lead to ruin.

But perhaps more significant then this was Germanicus' disastrous military campaign to finally subjugate in full the country bearing his name. This campaign of Germanicus was short and although he did not suffer any major military defeats, arguably the war was a ruinous enterprise which lead directly to his downfall.

Hmmm. I don't recall anything from the Constitution post regarding procedure for the senate to repeal an Emperor's title and authority, so I'm assuming it'll be a rogue assassin that ends his reign rather then a senatorial plot.

[Libertad]

This timeline is beyond wonderful. Well done, good sir!


Hmmm. I don't recall anything from the Constitution post regarding procedure for the senate to repeal an Emperor's title and authority, so I'm assuming it'll be a rogue assassin that ends his reign rather then a senatorial plot.

A rogue assassin hired to kill Germanicus as a result of a senatorial plot you mean right? ;) Dang, you can easily see a formation of secret alliances between senators and the Praetorian Guard here...

[Cyrus Alquist]

A rogue assassin hired to kill Germanicus as a result of a senatorial plot you mean right? ;) Dang, you can easily see a formation of secret alliances between senators and the Praetorian Guard here...
Well I suppose that could be it, but I'm inclined to doubt euromellows would take the timeline in that direction since it goes against the general theme of Drusian reforms stabilizing the republic. I'm thinking it'd probably be just a small clique of Vinicianus & friends, given what the last update said about Germanicus being too merciful towards him.

[slydessertfox]

This timeline is beyond wonderful. Well done, good sir!


Hmmm. I don't recall anything from the Constitution post regarding procedure for the senate to repeal an Emperor's title and authority, so I'm assuming it'll be a rogue assassin that ends his reign rather then a senatorial plot.

I was thinking he was going to die on campaign.

[Cyrus Alquist]

I was thinking he was going to die on campaign.
How would that fit with "in this case it could be argued Germanicus would have been well served acting the tyrant, since his restraint would ultimately lead to ruin." regarding his treatment of Vincianus?:confused:

[slydessertfox]

After reading it over again, I see what you mean.

[nlspeed]

Awesome timeline, I love the detail, the storytelling, the format, the subject... :p

[MerryPrankster]

Now that I can post again, I'll report that this thread has joined the august few that I've blogged about.

http://accordingtoquinn.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-constitutional-roman-empire-alternate.html

I'll definitely keep an eye on this one. Although it's been a long time since I've taken any classics classes, I do like Roman history.

[Shogun]

I hope he hasn't given up on this timeline.

[slydessertfox]

Yeah, I agree. This TL has a lot of promise.

[slydessertfox]

So I was thinking. In the TL itw as mentioned that Tacitus would become emperor. This leads me to believe Agricola (Tacitus's father in law) becomes emperor at some point, and Tacitus inherits his connections and manages to be elected emperor.

[euromellows]

Thanks for the posts. I'm working on the next update, sorry the progress is really slow.

So I was thinking. In the TL itw as mentioned that Tacitus would become emperor. This leads me to believe Agricola (Tacitus's father in law) becomes emperor at some point, and Tacitus inherits his connections and manages to be elected emperor.

Well done, you're the first to notice.

[slydessertfox]

Thanks for the posts. I'm working on the next update, sorry the progress is really slow.



Well done, you're the first to notice.

:D:D:D:D:D Can't wait. Glad to see it's not dead.

[slydessertfox]

So is this dead?

[Shogun]

Thanks for the posts. I'm working on the next update, sorry the progress is really slow.



Well done, you're the first to notice.

Is your next update ready?

[Shogun]

Have you given up on this timeline?