WI Battle of Carrhae in 53 BC a Roman Victory?

In 53 BC Crassus marched against Parthia with an army of 40000 soldiers when his army clashed with Prince Surena with an army of 10000...
Surena judged that the cataphract charge would not be enough to break the Roman lines. Thus, he sent his horse archers to bombard the Roman legionaries with arrows. However, Crassus ordered the legionaries into the testudo formation. The barrage eventually wore down the Roman lines.
Crassus's plan was to have his legionaries endure the archer fire until the horse archers ran out of arrows. After several hours, the legionaries began to collapse from heat exhaustion and thirst as well as to the constant stream of missiles. The Romans were completely surrounded. The tesdudo formations were holding up well though, but the testudo was extremly horrible in hand-to-hand combat. This factor inspired Surena to charge. The cataphracts' charge split the Roman army, and the Roman soldiers began to rout. Crassus was able to withdraw, but he had to leave behind thousands of wounded...
WI Crassus abandoned the testudo formation and ordered a direct attack to the cataphracts and horse archers? Surena was heavily outnumbered and wouldnt have last long...
How is a potential Parthian defeat altering History? Any thoughts?
 
if the romans advanced it probably would have been an even more humiliating battle, legionaires are the best infantry at the time in the world but they can't charge cavalry because cavalry are agile enough to escape, even heavily armoured cataphracts. their lines would have been disrupted and the horse archers could have taken down even more of them because they weren't in testudo formation and then the cataphracts could plow through the disrupted lines and potentially wipe them out

if crassus had agreed to go through armernia instead of the desert he could have linked up with the armenians and fought the whole parthian army including infantry on more favourable terrain. the armenians would have had a large cavalry force experienced enough to defeat the parthians own cavalry and the legionaries could have trounced the parthian infantry
 
probably... his death helped cut the relationship between pompey and caesar so we could see the triumvirate surviving much longer. he also could have become very rich from the silk he could export into rome if he survived and went on to take parthia. who knows, he could have been extremely impressed by horse archers/cataphracts and incorperated them into his army way earlier than the eastern roman empire did
 
Or on the other hand is Crassus that makes his bid for power instead of Caesar... Based on his victory over Parthians and his wealth (his personal wealth and the wealth brought by silk imports) "crosses the Rubicon"...
 
Keep in mind, Crassus is 70 years old at the time of Carrhae. I doubt he would have more than 10 years left to live, and even then, he would still have to pacify Parthia. It took Caesar, with greater forces and perhaps more military talent, at least that long to pacify Gaul. Imagine how long Crassus would have to spend to pacify the Parthians enough to be able to make ANY realistic bid for power in Rome. He would have to spend much time on campaign before he has legions that are as loyal to him as Caesar's were to him.

On the other hand, Crassus' son, who was at the time one of Caesar's best lieutenants, could be a real contender down the line. Imagine Crassus dying, say, around 50-49 BC, and the ascention of his son to command being the beginnings of a crisis. He has good military reputation, is respected in the legions, and he might be the guy that "crosses the Rubicon"... perhaps even in league with Caesar, given that the two always got along really well, and had much respect for one another...
 
That would be interesting... Crassus jr. and Caesar against Senate and Pompey... That may lead to Caesar being proclaimed Dictator Perpetuus as OTL and then formally adopting Crassus jr. as his heir (maybe nominating his as Magister Equituum his second in command to legitimise the succession following Republican precedent)
 
That would be interesting... Crassus jr. and Caesar against Senate and Pompey... That may lead to Caesar being proclaimed Dictator Perpetuus as OTL and then formally adopting Crassus jr. as his heir (maybe nominating his as Magister Equituum his second in command to legitimise the succession following Republican precedent)

Thats actually quite a good idea. . .
 
Thats actually quite a good idea. . .

pretty much the same as OTL but we replace Mark Antony with Crassus jr.
Maybe Caesar is still assassinated on 44 BC and Crassus becomes his successor against a disinherited Octavius and a disgraced Antony...
 
Top