alternatehistory.com

Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus dies 29BC. This is not difficult to achieve as Octavian was noteworthy for his poor health and come close to death only six years after the date for the PoD.

Now what? The republican system is obviously decimated if not completely dead, but what could probably replace it has not been decided. A pure monarchy, attempted by Caesar, has been a proven failure and the conservative Roman elite are without precedents as far as an alterative system is concerned. Furthermore none of Octavian’s co-commanders have the heritage or the ability to emerge as his logical successor, and so the established pattern would see a violent amongst them to decide the course of history. On the other hand, the Roman world is probably not overly anxious to return to civil war. The Roman Republic is exhausted, it has just suffered decades of civil wars and there is a general desire for peace and security. So what we are probably going to see is a return to the ‘Triumvirate’ system of government in which the Roman provinces are divided amongst the key players, leaving Rome under the nominal control of the Senate. One of the most prominent features of the Late Roman Republic was for ambitious Roman officials to become virtually ‘kings’ of their own provincial ‘kingdoms’ while the Senate remains it’s the visual trapping of autonomy at Rome. Antony in the East is the one extreme example, but similar behavior can be observed from Sertorius in Spain, Pompey in Syria, Caesar in Gaul and Pompeius in the West Mediterranean.

So let us speculate… After Octavian premature death in 29BC, the leaders of the Caesarian “Party” carve the Late Republic up in much the same style as the 55BC Conference of Luca. Who gets what is a matter of debate, especially on the subject of who the ‘who’ are who are getting the what. Agrippa and Maecenas are obvious contenders but who would be the third man? Any ideas or suggestions? Perhaps some respected senator, someone to add an air of legitimacy to the new government. Agrippa will probably be posted in the East, to deal with the Patharians and to secure the Danube while Maecenas may be given command of the legions along the problematic borders of Gaul and Germania. There is also the possibility for an additional division (because who said that the number of people at the top had to be three), composing the command of the legions in Syria (the Far East?) for the frequent campaigns against Persia (a Quadiumvirate? Any thoughts?). Our prospective ATL senator will be given Africa and the islands of the West Mediterranean, while the Senate will remain sovereign and independent in Italia. Of course as you can imagine, this sovereignty will be largely superficial, with the Senate and Rome acting as a kind of shadowy stage upon which the triumvirates play their political games for power and influence.

Now since the ‘Triumvirate’ system is hardly a stable form of imperial governance, the first century AD is probably going to be thronged by interesting civil wars. Obviously one general or another will attempt (and probably succeed) to unite the whole of the Roman world under his authority but I doubt that such a venture would be as stable OTL. The ‘window’ that Octavian exploited to gain supreme power would have closed and there would be a new and vigorous crop of aristocrats really to fight tooth and nail for the retention of their sovereign privileges (these privileges would in their view be inseparable from the label “Republicism” or maybe not, any thoughts?). What we will probably see is the momentary creations of unified “Empires” followed by subsequent re-divisions of the Roman world. These divisions are likely to follow a pretty established pattern, someone will get Italia and the fertile fields of Africa, someone will get command of the legions along the Danube (the East) and someone will get command of the legions along the Rhine (West). Or maybe not, any ideas?

Another thing to consider here is that along with the constant threat of civil war Triumvirates (or Quadiumvirates as the case may be) will have to prove their status as military commanders to gain legitimacy even more energetically than OTL Emperors (who had to constantly police the military achievement of potentially threatening subordinates). This will mean more military campaigns of territorial conquest, and there are certainly a few potentials overlooked by the OTL Emperors but the one that immediately comes to mind is Felix Arabia. Such a conquest would have some serious consequence for the Roman East, Nabataean Arabia is probably occupied earlier and we may see some ambitious Roman conquer push down the Nile - in which case one might see a Roman province of "Ethiopia," and which would be interesting. Any thoughts?
Top