AHC: Pompey has won Pharsalus; now save the Republic

maverick

Banned
On one side, this is a no-brainer: Caesar is defeated, the Republic lives on.

On the other, we must also consider the circumstances that led to the demise of the Republic and consider: was it the work of a few Great Men of History? or an inevitable consequence of Rome's history and development? All states go through periods of growth and decadence after all.

Say that Pompey becomes Dictator or Consul and the Optimates obtain power...is that "saving" the Republic? or simply condemning it to long series of dictators ala Sulla, with the Optimates and the military being the power behind the non-throne?

Let's assume that Pompey dies shortly after Caesar, avoiding a potential civil war between the Senate and Pompey should Pompey decide he wants more power, or the Senate decide to double-cross the General.

Titus Labienus, Cato, the Optimates and maybe the Pompey Family continue to rule Rome, with some wars against the Populare and Caesarian remnants being possibilities in the decade following Caesar's death.

All that is needed is to prevent another great Man of History such as Caesar or Augustus from overcoming the obstacles that are the Senate and the other institutions within the Republic. Whether that is possible given the late history of the Republic or the Republic's own militaristic and expansionist nature, is hard to determine.
 

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
I should clarify, I suppose, that by "save the Republic", I mean maintain the Senate and possibly the Tribal Assembly and/or tribunes as the ones who govern the empire.

So, likely, they're going to need some reforms...
 

mailinutile2

If Pompey keep Sulla as his model, the Republic is saved.
for some times, at least.
It depend whether the law on the political career progression is really enforced or not
 

maverick

Banned
mailinutile2 said:
If Pompey keep Sulla as his model, the Republic is saved.
for some times, at least.
It depend whether the law on the political career progression is really enforced or not
Click to expand...

You mean Sulla's dictatorship?

It would be stable, but wouldn't that be what Caesar and Augustus did, but with less titles?

I could be wrong, though, this area is far from my forte.

Is this what you're talking about?
Click to expand...

Interesting.

But that compromise broke down in the end of 2nd century BC. The narrow oligarchy of senatorial leaders got inefficient in recruiting.

They still were recruiting. Many homines novi tried to integrate into the system and uphold it - like Cicero. But there were many who tried to gain more by changing the system - starting with Gracchi.

In the end, Augustus broke the Senate oligarchy by allying with the wider class of curials and knights - exactly the class that had provided both Senate recruits as well as the popular opposition. During the Empire, emperors promoted on merit people from wide educated class of provincial city landowners.

How could the Republic be changed to allow for wider recruitment of curial classes?
Click to expand...

Perhaps if Pompey and his allies decide to branch out and recruit to keep the Populare remnant weak and short on numbers.
 

mailinutile2

maverick said:
You mean Sulla's dictatorship?

It would be stable, but wouldn't that be what Caesar and Augustus did, but with less titles?

I could be wrong, though, this area is far from my forte.
Click to expand...

I am sorry you are wrong.
Yes, I mean Sulla's dictatorship.

Many forget that Sulla become Dictator legibus faciendis et rei publicae constituendae causa (i.e. to re-order the laws of the Republic), re-ordered the cursus honorum that citizens had to make to progress in politics, and then stepped down from his power position.

Thus his example was the exact opposite of Caesar/Octavian (and also Marius), who kept that power for all their life.
Since Pompey had Sulla as an explicit model (while Caesar had him as the archetipical enemy figure), it could be that he would re-do his steps, i.e. to acqure the power, make some laws (to tilt the balance towards his interests, without doubts) and then step down.

Also, the regulated and progressive cursus honorum of the Sulla reform would (if applied) prevent the emergence of a too fast power rise (e.g. again Caesar, Augustus) because of its slow pace of progression.
(As a follower of the pars aristocratica, Sulla was naturally afraid of the emengence of a one-man-power, call it a king, a tyrant or an emperor).
The later meteoric rise of Caesar was possible since he violated the cursus honorum rules, basing himself on the aid the Plebs Tribunes
 
Last edited:

mailinutile2

I myself will get the power, will became Dictator legibus faciendis and will ban forever the habit of writing acronyms!
What the heck OP means? :D
 

DuQuense

All Republics Expand into Empire or Collapse into Anarchy
Click to expand...
this is a Quote I read years ago, except I can't find the Author.

I think Rome in the mid minus first Century, was posed on this Cusp, If whoever takes over does not go with Empire, Rome would/will collapse into history.
 

Kerblo

How exactly did Rome change after Caesar? It seems like it stayed the same with a new name; a government controlled by a few powerful noble and merchant families.
 

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
No, it became a government controlled by one man. And as oligarchical as Republican Rome may have been, it was a Republic nonetheless.

EDIT ADD: And, just to make sure there's no confusion about the challenge -- whether Rome reigns in, or even takes down, this oligarchy, has no bearing on the OP; all I am looking for is the preservation of the Republican form of government.
 
Last edited:

TaylorS

The republic was doomed when the common people were driven to support populists using unconstitutional measures (starting with Tiberius Gracchus) in reaction to the injustices inflected on them by the Aristocrats. The moment Tiberius Gracchus was murdered the death of The Republic was an inevitability.
 

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
The moment Tiberius Gracchus was murdered the death of The Republic was an inevitability.
Click to expand...

Still, 85 years later, the Republic hadn't quite been killed off; what I'm looking for is a scenario where it continues to straggle along, maybe get better, for another century and a half.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top