Spartacus makes it to Sicily

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

Historically Spartacus' forces had a deal with Sicilian pirates to get transported to Sicily, but were betrayed and trapped on the mainland of Italy. What if they had made it to Sicily because the pirates kept their contract? I'd imagine they'd conquer the island. What then for Rome and the new Kingdom of Sicily?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Servile_War#Crassus_and_Spartacus
The tide seemed to have turned in the war. Crassus' legions were victorious in several engagements, killing thousands of the rebel slaves, and forcing Spartacus to retreat south through Lucania to the straits near Messina. According to Plutarch, Spartacus made a bargain with Cilician pirates to transport him and some 2,000 of his men to Sicily, where he intended to incite a slave revolt and gather reinforcements. However, he was betrayed by the pirates, who took payment and then abandoned the rebel slaves.[39] Minor sources mention that there were some attempts at raft and shipbuilding by the rebels as a means to escape, but that Crassus took unspecified measures to ensure the rebels could not cross to Sicily, and their efforts were abandoned.[41]
 
I'm not sure it would end by a whole conquest of the island, but you have room for a lasting presence there.
Both the first Servile Wars happened there, and Eunus managed to forge if not an actual state, at least a relatively strong political organisation which would undoubtly serves as inspiration for servile armies.

The province was rich, and with an important servile population, so reinforcement and supply may not be an immediate problem.

As for Roman answer...I can see two, three things.

First, Pompey would still be there, in Spain and with possibility to come deal with Spartacus. Giving the province was damn important for Rome (especially on food supply), Romans were not going to accept any kind of social, productive and/or trade disruption : I'd expect a full scale expedition whenever possible.

That said, the governor at this time was Varrus, that entered in history for being so insanely corrupt that your average banana republic dictator looks saintly by comparison. Having Crassus or Pompey meddling in his lands would be a problem for him (critically because his management would likely not have threatened Servile army much, even if I don't see them taking over the island).

At this point a longer Servile War, as the Third Mithridatic War forces Rome to look elsewhere, is more than certain. You could even bet on a de facto alliance between Slaves and Mithridates.
I don't think, however, it would change much on the Armenian War : I simply don't see how Tigranes would benefit it, neither the Slaves.

It would, that said, probably force Romans to intervene on what ceased to be "only" a huge servile revolt (with all the social issues it could causes) but a possibly foreign support on a strategic province. But, maybe Pompey would be rather sent in Pont, letting Crassus the dubious honor to crush slaves (dubious as it was seen as dishonourable, of course).

But, Crassus being Crassus, not having too much trouble dirtying his hands, I think he would be able to take out of it a bigger political prestige than IOTL.
 
Sicily was where the last slave revolt had happened, so they might gain a lot of new followers. Ultimately, Crassus and Pompeius move on Sicily and crush the rebels after a bloody, drawn out campaign against Spartacist guerrillas.
 

Deleted member 1487

So its inevitable that Rome would win eventually once they decided to dedicate enough resources? It would just come down to what foreign wars they might want to put aside?
 
So its inevitable that Rome would win eventually once they decided to dedicate enough resources? It would just come down to what foreign wars they might want to put aside?

Frankly, I think so.
From one hand we have a rag-tag group made of former slaves, free peasants, deserters, men, women, children without clear goal or unity.
From the other we have a mediterranean superpower, with veterans armies ready to serves, united against a social threat.

It comes down to how long Slaves could hold their ground, as there was no way that Rome would ever even think to negociate with them, would it be to make a bloody exemple out of them.*

It doesn't mean that consequences wouldn't be different tough : it can have a real impact on Late Republican politics.

*Actually successful slave revolts can be counted on one hand : I can't think of anything but Haiti myself, and it was in very particular context.
 
Top