Commodus Dies Young: Who Does Marcus Aurelius Adopt?

What it says on the tin. MA’s kids had a habit of dying young, except for Commodus. If he followed his siblings’ example, who might MA tap?
 
Marcus Aurelius should've chosen as his successor either Pertinax or Avidius Cassius. Now we know the latter made a bid for the purple in 175. Too bad he didn't succeed. Not only would he have preempted the screwball commodus, he could've established a better tradition of military discipline--exactly what Rome needed, when it needed it: the dawn of the third century. Instead Severus established a tradition which exacerbated the crisis.
 
Not sure I buy the argument that Avidius Cassius using the army to seize the throne establishes a tradition of military discipline. If anything his coup succeeding would only bolster the army's desire to seek a bonus by overthrowing the Emperor. Something that happened to an unprecedented level just a few generations later.

Also does Cassius being successful mean any significant shortening of the already long-dragging Marcomannic War? Long wars like that are rarely good for discipline of large field forces. Or does it reverse the effects of the damaging Antonine Plague?
 
Last edited:
What about Lucius Verus surviving whatever killed him - he died when Commodus was eight. Or failing Lucius Verus, what about one of Aurelius' sons-in-law? Tiberius Claudius Pompeianus was reportedly offered the throne several times (the first when his wife, Commodus' sister tried to have her brother assassinated, I figure she intended for Pompeianus to take over the imperial throne) but turned it down. Whether this was out of loyalty to Commodus or out of sheer lack of ambition IDK, but it could make for fun times.
 
Without any living heirs, Aurelius Avidius Cassius would be a strong choice for Aurelius's successor. Cassius had support within the imperial family (his rebellion, after all, was prompted by the belief that Aurelius was dead and was at least nominally based off of letters he had received from Aurelius's wife). Cassius also has an impeccable family pedigree. He is related to Augustus (his mother was the great-grand daughter of Junia Lepida, who was also the great granddaughter Augustus), Herod The Great, and was a direct descendant of the Seleucid kings of Commagene.

Alternatively, and probably more likely, is Tiberius Claudius Pompeianus. Pompeianus was one of the closest confidants of Aurelius and the brother in law of Commodus via marriage to Marcus Aurelius's daughter Lucilla, which signals the high regard he was held in by the emperor. IOTL Aurelius even went so far as to name Pompeianus Caesar, but this offer was refused. Which is I think the only way Cassius gets offered the throne-if Pompeianus, for some reason or another, refuses the offer to be Aurelius's successor. Should he accept though, he'd make a fine emperor. Unfortunately we don't know enough about his son (who was executed by Caracalla) to be able to figure out how that dynasty would turn out. One thing is for certain though, there are very few options that could turn out worse than the Severans.


Not sure I buy the argument that Avidius Cassius using the army to seize the throne establishes a tradition of military discipline. If anything his coup succeeding would only bolster the army's desire to seek a bonus by overthrowing the Emperor. Something that happened to an unprecedented level just a few generations later.
In the scenario you're referring to, Cassius does not revolt, but is adopted by Aurelius as heir. Which is a perfectly likely scenario, he had a good relationship with Aurelius and his family (hence why he was trusted with such a sweeping command in Syria in the first place) and was top among Aurelius's generals.

Also does Cassius being successful mean any significant shortening of the already long-dragging Marcomannic War? Long wars like that are rarely good for discipline of large field forces. Or does it reverse the effects of the damaging Antonine Plague?
I don't think anyone is saying that replacing Commodus with someone else is going to make the third century not bad for the Roman Empire. It will be bad no matter what they do, due to forces beyond their control (climate change, disease, etc.). However the collapse in military discipline and the wrecking of the financial system is something that occurred under Commodus and then was exacerbated to an absurd extent by the Severans. There is no reason to assume at this stage that the army has to become the mess it became over the next few decades, nor does the fiscal situation of the empire have to be so disastrous.
 
yes but it might not be as bad,third century marked a lot of infighting and commodus was not much interested in ruling instead he let others do job for him until it backfired on him and he decided to take more power witch in turn was the reason he was killed off.I think as long Rome avoid civil war it will be better off but there are still many problems that Rome needs to fix in order to survive as one Empire
 
Alternatively, and probably more likely, is Tiberius Claudius Pompeianus. Pompeianus was one of the closest confidants of Aurelius and the brother in law of Commodus via marriage to Marcus Aurelius's daughter Lucilla, which signals the high regard he was held in by the emperor. IOTL Aurelius even went so far as to name Pompeianus Caesar, but this offer was refused. Which is I think the only way Cassius gets offered the throne-if Pompeianus, for some reason or another, refuses the offer to be Aurelius's successor. Should he accept though, he'd make a fine emperor. Unfortunately we don't know enough about his son (who was executed by Caracalla) to be able to figure out how that dynasty would turn out. One thing is for certain though, there are very few options that could turn out worse than the Severans.
I have my doubts about Pompeianus, given that he repeatedly turned the imperial honours down, but he'd probably do well if he actually accepted.
 
Not sure I buy the argument that Avidius Cassius using the army to seize the throne establishes a tradition of military discipline.

I meant Marcus aurelius choosing him as a successor.


Also does Cassius being successful mean any significant shortening of the already long-dragging Marcomannic War? Long wars like that are rarely good for discipline of large field forces. Or does it reverse the effects of the damaging Antonine Plague?

Assuming Cassius wouldn't take over until 180 CE--though he could become co-emperor--things would go pretty much as in the OTL, except there wouldn't be the interruption of 175, although Cassius would still have to deal with the insurrection of 172. The key advantage I perceive is more longterm--heightened discipline--and Cassius was a disciplinarian.
True some third century problems like plague and perhaps inflation, might be unavoidable but it might've helped if the century began with the tradition of Cassius instead of the "pampering" one of Severus. Btw Cassius was also a good commander. Had he or someone established some means of getting only competent generals in command, that would've gone a long way toward obviating the mid century setbacks.
 
Out of curiosity, assuming Commodus dies young, what's to stop M. Aurelius from naming another son, (Marcus Annius Verus) or his son-in-law (Lucius Verus) or grandson (Lucius' son) as heir? If Commodus dies in his first year of life, then what's there to stop Marcus Annius Verus Caesar (b.162) surviving? Esp. since Annius was named heir in 166, alongside Commodus.
 
Out of curiosity, assuming Commodus dies young, what's to stop M. Aurelius from naming another son, (Marcus Annius Verus) or his son-in-law (Lucius Verus) or grandson (Lucius' son) as heir? If Commodus dies in his first year of life, then what's there to stop Marcus Annius Verus Caesar (b.162) surviving? Esp. since Annius was named heir in 166, alongside Commodus.
Presumably ITTL they both die.
 
Presumably ITTL they both die.
It's not like he was lacking in sons-in-law, so is the Antonine Plague just like FOXDIE in this universe?

"Marcus Plautius Quintillus? I'm here to rescue you."

"Avidius Cassius is out of control! He'll launch Gear Metallum if he finds the cardkey-HHRRRGGGGHHHHH
 
Out of curiosity, assuming Commodus dies young, what's to stop M. Aurelius from naming another son, (Marcus Annius Verus) or his son-in-law (Lucius Verus) or grandson (Lucius' son) as heir? If Commodus dies in his first year of life, then what's there to stop Marcus Annius Verus Caesar (b.162) surviving? Esp. since Annius was named heir in 166, alongside Commodus.

We’re assuming that everyone who died prior to Marcus Aurelius’ death in history still dies. So, all of his other sons still die.
 
and we are still are not close to deciding who Marcus Aurelius Adopt.I think the best answer we dont know as cant really decide what would Marcus look in successor he did let Commodus inherit him regardless what moves like
The Fall of the Roman Empire and Gladiator want us to believe
 
Top