King Thomas
Banned
At one time Julius Ceaser was captured by pirates, but they ransomed him. What if they had sold him into slavery instead? How would Roman history have changed then?
Three interesting results: The Czar and the Kaiser would have been called something else, as well as New Jersey.
Three interesting results: The Czar and the Kaiser would have been called something else, as well as New Jersey.
The POD might be that the pirate who captures Caesar isn't homosexual or bisexual. Apparently he forced himself on Caesar while he was a captive.
The pirates might be inclined to get rid of him earlier that way.
The POD might be that the pirate who captures Caesar isn't homosexual or bisexual. Apparently he forced himself on Caesar while he was a captive.
The pirates might be inclined to get rid of him earlier that way.
For the pirates to sell Caesar into slavery would be a major deviation from SOP. As was pointed out, he was a very valuable catch and certainly radiated the auctoritas that went with it. Prisoners like that were ransomed, not sold. There is no way Caesar would not have let people know who he was, so even if the pirates had decided to dispose of him in Delos or Rhodes (the usual places for these transactions), his first owner would have quickly been informed of the realities of his situation (which was basically the choice of a rich reward for returning him to Rome or a slow and interesting death for trying to keep him as soon as the first Roman official heard of this).
We should not view the piracy-slavery nexus as either a phenomenon of organised crime or something that went on beyond the pale of civilisation. It was accepted and tolerated by the powers that be as long as everyone played by the rules, and one of the rules was that Roman citizens of note were not for sale. Class makes all the difference in the world - nobody would bat an eyelid at a farmer from Umbria or a sailor from Tarentum going off to auction.
I wonder how long he would have lasted as a slave, assuming he was sold in first place. We're talking about Ceasar, here - one of the most ambicious men in history. Also tough and intelligent. Such a man wouldn't have been a good slave. I believe he would have died rather quickly.
Actually Caesar was accused early in his life for having sexual relations with Nicomedes King of Bithynia.... This gossip was so widely spread that upon celebrating his triumph in Rome the Romans called him "Queen of Nicomedes"...
Well, I doubt if Caesar would have suffered any master at all. He was extremely ambitious, quite arrogant and somehow I don't see him calling anyone "master". Perhaps if he was sold to some eastern kingdom (Parthia?) and castrated...Ancient slavery is not just chattel slavery. If he was sold to the right kind of owner he could have foiud an outlet for his ambition easily enough. Assuming he was sold under normal circumstances (i.e. not to cover a disappearance or exact vengeance), a man of his abilities (literate in Latin and Greek, numerate, a gifted speaker, well-mannered and quick-witted) would have fetched a price far beyond what a quarry owner or farm manager would be willing to pay. He is house slave material and as such might end up a teacher or personal tutor to a son of the upper classes, a manager of estates, business plenipotentiary or supervisor of investment performance (procurator - broadly the ancient equivalent of a controller, except nastier). We have evidence for slaves routinely running businesses, commanding ships and representing their owners as plenipotentiary agents in financial matters (not in politics and law). Caesar as a slave could have made a career. Of course IRL he would simply tell his master who he was and that would have been that.
The Isle of Jersey was originally called Cesaria. It evolved into "Jersey."New Jersey?