WI Marcus Aurelius chooses a better heir.
- Thread starter Teshuvah
- Start date
Probably a bit longer. The biggest problems of the Roman Empire were its really weak succession system (seriously, when the people you deem barbarians have a much more clear-cut system, it says something) and its size (i.e., both too large and not large enough).
Well it's like Savoy said, if his successor had been into establishing the method of succession a bit, land reform and whatnot, maybe a little bit of Barbarian pacifying here and there, the world would be a vastly different place.
I think that if he knew what would happen after his death, he would tell history to go suck it.
Remarkable maturity at three years old...
...The wiki article shows him as a mature man when he only lived for three years.
...The wiki article shows him as a mature man when he only lived for three years.
It would not be logical for Marcus to disinherit his own son –a move almost without precedent in Roman Imperial History. The reason, during the period known as “The Five Good Emperors”, men of merit were selected for the purple rather than men of blood was that the individual Emperors doing the selecting had no male heirs of their own.
Returning to the question: The easiest way to achieve a “merit succession” under Marcus Aurelius is to allow the revolt of Avidius Cassius in 175 AD to succeed. Cassius had revolted originally because he heard Marcus was dying and the Emperor’s wife Faustina had asked him to be her (and 13-year-old-Commodus) protector. Cassius was a good choice for a protector: he had the loyalty of the Eastern troops; he had shown good conduct in the recent Parthian War (capturing Ctespiphon); and had a lifetime of experience as a military commander and politician. But when Marcus got better from his illness, Cassius was put in very awkward position and his troop killed him.
So PoD: when Marcus Aurelius falls sick in 175 he succumbs to his illness and dies. Avidius Cassius –in league with Faustina –takes command of the East and prepares to march west. If the Danbue legions go over to Cassius (because he has the backing of the Aurelian Family) then the rest of the West (including the Senate) will probably fold. After that Cassius is adopted into the Aurelian Family and the Empire has a seasoned military man in charge and not some spoiled Hercules-obsessed kid.
Any thoughts?
Returning to the question: The easiest way to achieve a “merit succession” under Marcus Aurelius is to allow the revolt of Avidius Cassius in 175 AD to succeed. Cassius had revolted originally because he heard Marcus was dying and the Emperor’s wife Faustina had asked him to be her (and 13-year-old-Commodus) protector. Cassius was a good choice for a protector: he had the loyalty of the Eastern troops; he had shown good conduct in the recent Parthian War (capturing Ctespiphon); and had a lifetime of experience as a military commander and politician. But when Marcus got better from his illness, Cassius was put in very awkward position and his troop killed him.
So PoD: when Marcus Aurelius falls sick in 175 he succumbs to his illness and dies. Avidius Cassius –in league with Faustina –takes command of the East and prepares to march west. If the Danbue legions go over to Cassius (because he has the backing of the Aurelian Family) then the rest of the West (including the Senate) will probably fold. After that Cassius is adopted into the Aurelian Family and the Empire has a seasoned military man in charge and not some spoiled Hercules-obsessed kid.
Any thoughts?
Are you reading the same Wikipedia article as I am? He is listed as having been 7 years old at his death, and would have been 17 years old at the death of Marcus Aurelius. I can see nothing in the article claiming or implying that he was an adult at the time of his death.
The picture on the coin to the right has a beard. That's what he's talking about.
Max Sinister
Banned
The interesting thing: Right until his death, Marcus Aurelius had fought some Germanic tribes in Bohemia and Hungary. (Commodus gave these up, because his buddies in Rome told him it'd be too dangerous to fight there.) Marcus had already planned to create two new provinces (Markomannia and Sarmatia, I think), and moved the Roman border in the north-east to the Sudeten and Carpathian mountains respectively. In other words: Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary and Transsylvania would've been Romanized, at least for a short time. Might not have stopped the Germanics forever, but could've bought some time. Let alone the fact that pretty much anyone would've been better than Commodus. And there'd be no succession trouble like after his death either.
Why not have Commodus twin brother Titus Aurelius Fulvus Antoninus be the successor. The twin angle really makes it appealing to me. The "evil twin" lived in OTL and really didn't resemble his father at all in temperament. Titus died young at the age of four. If Titus had lived and turned out to be a chip off the old block while Commodus died young, Rome would have been in a much better position.
If Titus had only lived as long as his father (58) he would have reigned 39 years, if he had lived as long as Augustus (75) he would have reigned a staggering 56. Assuming even average competence in both military and civil affairs, such a long period of stable rule could have strengthened the Empire, bypassing the Severan Dynasty and their troubled rule which laid the foundation for the crisis of the Third century. Consolidation of his father's conquest and fortification of the mountainous border of the new frontier could only have helped resist the coming storm.
This likely would have led to further fighting in Germania Magna, but the Romans would be in a good position to weather that and even make further gains. The Germania of the late 2nd and early 3rd century was not the Germania of the turn of the millennium and worth conquering by this point.
Other opportunities for conflict during this reign would have been with the Parthians who were relatively weak at this point. The Emperors Septimius Severus and Caracalla waged successful campaigns against them and they eventually fell to the Sassanids.
Isn't the Marcus Aurelius succession question a bit oversold anyway? After all, what happened after Commodus' death was no worse than what had happened after Nero's - and that had done the Empire no tremendous harm. Things had gone on fine for another century and a half.
The real trouble didn't start until the death of Alexander Severus in 235, after which you got a new Emperor every two or three years for the next half-century or so. It's an interesting question exactly why that happened, but is there the slightest reason to think it was anything much to do with Commodus, who by that time had been forty years in his grave?
The real trouble didn't start until the death of Alexander Severus in 235, after which you got a new Emperor every two or three years for the next half-century or so. It's an interesting question exactly why that happened, but is there the slightest reason to think it was anything much to do with Commodus, who by that time had been forty years in his grave?
After nearly a century of peaceful succession and good governance,
Commodus ushered in a period of unstable misrule punctuated by murder,
an example that Severans followed, laying the ground for the Crisis of the
Third Century. He also let slip away all the gains against the Germans that
his father had made.
Surely 40 years of stable rule and a continuance of the policies of Marcus
Aurelius would have been preferable to that.
Here's a map I found of Europe during the late 2nd/early 3rd centuries.
Marcus Aurelius subjugated the Marcomanni, the Quadi and the Iazyges.
Last edited:
Thanks.
That's true. However the longer the period of stability and relative peace lasts the stronger the Empire will be militarily, economically and with regards to social cohesion when serious outside pressure starts to be applied in the 4th century
I was just thinking about something similar: what if Commodus was gender-swapped, then the emperor would have to find a good husband for her who would rule the empire after he was gone. Then he'd be free to choose someone on their qualities. Also, an ego-maniacal Commotia would be interesting.