WI Mark Antony Killed Clodius (late 53 BC)?

Very shortly before he was killed OTL by Milo, Publius Clodius Pulcher had an altercation with former ally Mark Antony, who was now sleeping with his wife at the time. To quote Goldsworthy:

"His old quarrel with Clodius reignited and on one occasion a sword-armed Mark Antony let a group that chased him into a bookshop. Clodius barricaded himself inside and managed to repel the attack, but Cicero was probably right to claim that only this prevented his murder."

So what if Clodius had not managed this and died there and then at Antony's hand? I can think of two big changes: one, Milo not being the culprit means he can pursue his political career further; two, Antony being the culprit means he may not make it to join Caesar's legions in Gaul. The latter has a very good chance of turning the Battle of Alesia into a defeat for Caesar, which of course has massive implications of its own.

What do you guys think?
 
Very shortly before he was killed OTL by Milo, Publius Clodius Pulcher had an altercation with former ally Mark Antony, who was now sleeping with his wife at the time. To quote Goldsworthy:

"His old quarrel with Clodius reignited and on one occasion a sword-armed Mark Antony let a group that chased him into a bookshop. Clodius barricaded himself inside and managed to repel the attack, but Cicero was probably right to claim that only this prevented his murder."

So what if Clodius had not managed this and died there and then at Antony's hand? I can think of two big changes: one, Milo not being the culprit means he can pursue his political career further; two, Antony being the culprit means he may not make it to join Caesar's legions in Gaul. The latter has a very good chance of turning the Battle of Alesia into a defeat for Caesar, which of course has massive implications of its own.

What do you guys think?

I think there is nothing that can make US believe that Anthony was essential at Alesia. He was co leading with Trebonius defensive operations against gaulish attacks.

However he was probably decisive in early 48 when Caesar needed him to boldly cross the Adriatic sea for large parts of his army.

OTL, Anthony became an important lieutenant of Caesar but in late 50-early 49, after Labienus deserted Caesar for Pompey who had always been his patron.
 
I think there is nothing that can make US believe that Anthony was essential at Alesia. He was co leading with Trebonius defensive operations against gaulish attacks.
Even so, Alesia was a very close thing for Caesar OTL as it is; not saying he's necessarily doomed at this battle if Antony is not there, but it does seem like a plausible effect.

And even if Caesar still wins Alesia as OTL and crosses the Rubicon a couple years later, as you note, Caesar would have a harder time beating Pompey.
 
Top