WI: Marcus Aurelius dies early, Lucius Verus's son survives and ascends as Augustus

As the title says. Let's say Marcus and Lucius swap death-dates, so that Marcus dies in 169 AD and Lucius dies in 180 AD, with Lucius succeeded by his son (also named Lucius Verus), who is handwaved into surviving his infancy. Would a surviving Lucius Verus make much of a difference to the affairs of the Empire between 169-180 AD and beyond, or did its long-term trends mean that the military anarchy just around the corner was inevitable anyway, Commodus or no?

Meditations is, of course, butterflied away, but could Stoicism persist?
 
Would a surviving Lucius Verus make much of a difference to the affairs of the Empire between 169-180 AD and beyond, or did its long-term trends mean that the military anarchy just around the corner was inevitable anyway, Commodus or no?

There are already a lot of threads and timelines about Commodus not becoming emperor. We discussed exactly this question more than once.

So the search function and "Commodus" are your friend.
 
Oof, harsh. I was also hoping to foster discussion of the differences in style and rule between Marcus and Lucius, though; are there many threads on that topic?
 
Top