Long Term Roman Fragmentation in First Cenury B.C.?

Could the Civil Wars that the Roman Republic have "Ended" with Roman Generals having carved out spheres of influence but unable to effectively go on the offensive for fear of being "jumped" by another General, say something like the situation of Sextus Pompey, but say 5-6 generals in that situation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sextus_Pompey
 

ar-pharazon

Banned
I have thought about this and think it's an interesting idea-what if say both Octavian and Mark Antony as well as any other challengers both die?

Roman commanders seize parts of the de facto empire and carve out their own domains.
 

ar-pharazon

Banned
Maybe we could see Roman general's and so on carving out parts of the Mediterranean world for themselves and fighting over the remains of the empire.

A Roman diadochi period.

I could see Rome being the symbolic center of imperial power and hence it and Italy fought over intently.

I can also see Egypt, Greece and Carthage gaining independence under Roman warlords and heavy fighting for control of Gaul and Iberia.

Someone should really do a timeline on this.

The Parthians will have it much easier-instead of facing a united empire to the west they can fight on at a time and strike when they are in a position of strength.

I can see this leading to an earlier Germanic migration-with Roman successor states employing German mercenaries against one another.

Basically no Pax Romana. But instead a
pro eadem bellis et manubiis or a
bellum diuersitatem successorum
 
I'd imagine the core new kingdoms to be:
  • Gallia
  • Hispania
  • Africa/Numidia
  • Graecia?
The Ptolemy's would still reign in Egypt. Judea/Syria might be conqured by them or just under their influnce. Asia minor is probably a mess. And Greece/Macedonia might be united, or it might fracture in nasty ways
 

ar-pharazon

Banned
Wait wasn't Egypt conquered at this point or under Roman influence anyway?

For any Roman general or warlord Egypt is a tempting target.

Asia Minor would most definitely be a mess-with Greek remnants, Roman warlords, Mithridatic remnants among other things battling for control.

I'm somewhat hesitant to think the Roman successor states would last very long. The Parthians will be in a far better position to restore the old Achaemenid empire's borders, the Germanic tribes will have a much easier time.

Or maybe not-perhaps constant conflict and struggle between Roman successor states will prevent the stagnation and other problems that plagued the OTL Roman Empire.

Perhaps such conflict will accelerate technological progress.
 

PhilippeO

Banned
with negligible cultural difference, general who could build strong fleet might gain momentum, defeated enemy one by one, and reunify Meds ?
 

ar-pharazon

Banned
with negligible cultural difference, general who could build strong fleet might gain momentum, defeated enemy one by one, and reunify Meds ?
It's possible but there wasn't much cultural difference between Alexander's successors either(at least at first).

I'm sure a lot of generals would try and one might succeed or none of them would,
.
 
with negligible cultural difference, general who could build strong fleet might gain momentum, defeated enemy one by one, and reunify Meds ?

... except there WOULD be notable cultural differences between the different parts of the Empire, at least in the sense of the local elites the Roman generals would have to depend on in order to retain civil order/build up the stable successor states, and would have to deal with more external military pressures. The Successor States had the advantage of their non-Hellenic borders being on highly sparcely populated or easily defendable frontiers (With, arguably, the exception of Macedonia itself to the north and west). The, say, Syrian or Gaulic Empire won't have such a luxary
 
PoDs

Caesar dies at Alesia. A generation later leadership splits after Pompey's death.

Lepidus retains his rule of Africa. Anthony, Lepidus and Octavian don't eliminate Sextus Pompey.

Pharsalus is draw or Caesarian defeat.
 
No. For a very simple reason, Roman ideology was centred on Rome and the latin language, and by extension Roman Identity, this doesnt really line up with generals carving out domains.
 

ar-pharazon

Banned
No. For a very simple reason, Roman ideology was centred on Rome and the latin language, and by extension Roman Identity, this doesnt really line up with generals carving out domains.
I don't see why if the major players die then it wouldn't be possible for reunification to not happen.

After all none of Alexander's successors were strong enough to reunify his empire.
 
My understanding of the second triumvirate is that Marc Anthony got the best richest part, the east. Octavian the second best. Lepidus was never important and he had to take whatever the other two didn't want the other to have. Marc Anthony losing in the end at Actium was all but inevitable.

I'd imagine the core new kingdoms to be:
  • Gallia
Galia in this time was stil recovering from the wars of Caesar (It lost one third of its population) That part isn't viable on its own.
This one could hold out for a while. It has some population to recruit and some money. (The Marians could defy the senate from here for some years.
  • Africa/Numidia
Lepidus part could have been taken away at any moment by one of the others. So also not viable
  • Graecia?
The Ptolemy's would still reign in Egypt. Judea/Syria might be conqured by them or just under their influnce. Asia minor is probably a mess. And Greece/Macedonia might be united, or it might fracture in nasty ways
The main factors here are manpower and money. You need one of them to survive. Octavian had the manpower of Italy, Spain (and Gaul) Marc Anthony had the money (mostly through tributes of the semi-independent kingdoms of the east) to raise his troops.
 
If both Octavian, Mark Antony, and Lepidus are dead I don't see why fragmentation would be impossible.

You do realise that the Senate is still quite strong at this point? No if all three die, more likely their lieutenants and followers would follow in their footsteps, I can however, see Egypt becoming free for a time, and a weaker Roman control on the East, in general.
 
Top