WI Rome abolishes slavery?

WI the revolt of Spartacus brought about Rome's abolition of slavery? Perhaps Spartacus and his Army escapes to Greece and then there is an invasion from Persia (or whoever was the Eastern power then). Spartacus gives Rome a choice, face massive slave revolts in the East and his Army joining the invaders, or abolish slavery and he will fight for the Empire.

What would happen, would the abolition of slavery abolish Rome or would the practical citizens buckle down and invent calculus and modern engineering 2000 years early to replace all the humans?

a. If they had left Italy, Spartacus's army would have split up.
b. Why on earth should there be a massive invasion of Greece from Persia (or rather Parthia at that time) or any place at that time? Unlike the time of Xerxes, Parthia no longer controlled Asia Minor. Pontus had been the most important power in Asia Minor and that had been over-run by Lucullus.
c. Is there any evidence that Spartacus (unlike some of the leaders of the Sicilian Servile Wars) wanted the abolition of slavery?
d. The Roman Senate (which by custom conducted foreign affairs) would have refused to treat with a slave. Dignitas alone would have ruled it out.
e. Abolish slavery. Where? All over the mediterranean? In Roman controlled territories? This implies a system of administration which simply did not exist under the Roman Republic.

Slave revolts were commonplace in antiquity, and one more revolt, even as large and devastating as that of Spartacus isn't going to suddenly convince the Roman elite that they need to give up slavery. All that free productivity isn't going to be abandoned.

Even if the revolt was more successful, say Spartacus' army escapes to Gaul (where most of the slaves were from), all it does is embolden the Romans to capture Gaul earlier.

The fact that the revolt wasn't banked on by Rome's enemies suggests that slave revolts were taken so unseriously by everyone that they were not even worth taking advantage of even to defeat one's enemies.

Adamanteus,

We had a "Spartacus vs. Crassus in Sicily" scenario, and we discussed how Parthia could aid Spartacus and company if they seized control over Sicily and cut off Rome's grain supply. If they managed to do THIS (establish territorial control over a strategically vital area), they'd suddenly be a whole lot more respectable.

Now, Rome controlled most of the Med basin at the time, but Parthia could try using secret agents to smuggle gold and arms under the Romans' noses, or invade Asia Minor to draw off Roman forces.

The problem is, this sort of question tends to sound like: " What if Nat Turner's revolt had been more successful and his supporters marched to California and then there was a Japanese invasion and Turner said he'd support the USA if the New Deal were introduced throughout the Americas." It's about as anachronistic as that.