WI Octavian dies 40 BC

So in the weeks leading up to the Treaty of Brundisium, in the aftermath of Fulvia's Rebellion, Mark Antony was raising troops to move against the young Caesar; apparently, he intended to make his peace with Sextus Pompey and (AIUI) give him the new spot in the Triumvir. What ended up saving Octavian was that the soldiers, essentially, refused to fight, and from the bottom up insisted that Antony and Caesar's heir work out their differences.

So here's my question -- what happens if Octavian dies (by illness, poison, suicide, what have you) before this deal can be struck?

CONSOLIDATION: Here's a possibly crazy thought -- maybe this means a potential return to the Republic? Hear me out:

Sextus Pompey has by this point given refuge to a number of fleeing republicans following the formation of the Second Triumvirate, plus his father fought with the Optimates; he's more than likely to be sympathetic. And who, aside from Mark Antony, would the anti-republican Caesarians follow to oppose him? Lepidus? That guy couldn't lead his way out of a small sack. Cleopatra's son? Pretty extreme, even for Caesar's loyalest followers, without someone like Antony propping the lad up.

So that just leaves Mark Antony himself, and he didn't seem to take ideological issue with the republican form of government the way Octavian did. To start with, the boy was from the provinces, while Antony had made his bones in the bustle of Roman politics; Antony was always more ready to negotiate with Sextus Pompey than Octavian was; and he, of the three Triumvirs, was the one most concerned with achieving Caesar's vision of a War with Parthia. Plus in later decades OTL, Octavian (then Augustus) would appropriate the moralism of republican sentiment to shore up his own regime, something I can't see Antony trying or pulling off. (And of course, it goes without saying that Antony had not really tied himself to Cleopatra by this point as he would later OTL.)

So we might have a new "lead citizen" of the Roman Empire who has very little interest in managing state affairs, perfectly content to let the republican traditions that governed the state until recently reassert themselves. What do you guys think?
 
Last edited:
So in the weeks leading up to the Treaty of Brundisium, in the aftermath of Fulvia's Rebellion, Mark Antony was raising troops to move against the young Caesar; apparently, he intended to make his peace with Sextus Pompey and (AIUI) give him the new spot in the Triumvir. What ended up saving Octavian was that the soldiers, essentially, refused to fight, and from the bottom up insisted that Antony and Caesar's heir work out their differences.

So here's my question -- what happens if Octavian dies (by illness, poison, suicide, what have you) before this deal can be struck?

CONSOLIDATION: Here's a possibly crazy thought -- maybe this means a potential return to the Republic? Hear me out:

Sextus Pompey has by this point given refuge to a number of fleeing republicans following the formation of the Second Triumvirate, plus his father fought with the Optimates; he's more than likely to be sympathetic. And who, aside from Mark Antony, would the anti-republican Caesarians follow to oppose him? Lepidus? That guy couldn't lead his way out of a small sack. Cleopatra's son? Pretty extreme, even for Caesar's loyalest followers, without someone like Antony propping the lad up.

So that just leaves Mark Antony himself, and he didn't seem to take ideological issue with the republican form of government the way Octavian did. To start with, the boy was from the provinces, while Antony had made his bones in the bustle of Roman politics; Antony was always more ready to negotiate with Sextus Pompey than Octavian was; and he, of the three Triumvirs, was the one most concerned with achieving Caesar's vision of a War with Parthia. Plus in later decades OTL, Octavian (then Augustus) would appropriate the moralism of republican sentiment to shore up his own regime, something I can't see Antony trying or pulling off. (And of course, it goes without saying that Antony had not really tied himself to Cleopatra by this point as he would later OTL.)

So we might have a new "lead citizen" of the Roman Empire who has very little interest in managing state affairs, perfectly content to let the republican traditions that governed the state until recently reassert themselves. What do you guys think?

Never! The Republic is dead, long live the Roman Empire!

But seriously, i have little knowledge in this point in time, but given how corrupt and awful the Roman Republic was, a Empire is far better then a comeback of the Republic.
 
I always found it difficult to guess how Antony would rule mostly because he was a basket of contradictions. He wanted Sextus Pompey to be in on the triumvirate but that was in large part mainly just as a strong counterweight to Octavian. With Octavian dead, Antony just give some subordinate (or Lepidus) the task of defeating Sextus and provide him with the men and ships to make it happen.

I imagine Antony's days are numbered if he somehow ends up the only man (or one of two men, maybe letting Lepidus manage affairs for him), left ruling. While he wasn't as careless about managing government affairs as he's portrayed, he was hardly active and hardly the most prudent of politicians. I can't see him lasting long before a conspiracy gains enough steam to successfully kill him.
 
So in the weeks leading up to the Treaty of Brundisium, in the aftermath of Fulvia's Rebellion, Mark Antony was raising troops to move against the young Caesar; apparently, he intended to make his peace with Sextus Pompey and (AIUI) give him the new spot in the Triumvir. What ended up saving Octavian was that the soldiers, essentially, refused to fight, and from the bottom up insisted that Antony and Caesar's heir work out their differences.

So here's my question -- what happens if Octavian dies (by illness, poison, suicide, what have you) before this deal can be struck?

CONSOLIDATION: Here's a possibly crazy thought -- maybe this means a potential return to the Republic? Hear me out:

Sextus Pompey has by this point given refuge to a number of fleeing republicans following the formation of the Second Triumvirate, plus his father fought with the Optimates; he's more than likely to be sympathetic. And who, aside from Mark Antony, would the anti-republican Caesarians follow to oppose him? Lepidus? That guy couldn't lead his way out of a small sack. Cleopatra's son? Pretty extreme, even for Caesar's loyalest followers, without someone like Antony propping the lad up.

So that just leaves Mark Antony himself, and he didn't seem to take ideological issue with the republican form of government the way Octavian did. To start with, the boy was from the provinces, while Antony had made his bones in the bustle of Roman politics; Antony was always more ready to negotiate with Sextus Pompey than Octavian was; and he, of the three Triumvirs, was the one most concerned with achieving Caesar's vision of a War with Parthia. Plus in later decades OTL, Octavian (then Augustus) would appropriate the moralism of republican sentiment to shore up his own regime, something I can't see Antony trying or pulling off. (And of course, it goes without saying that Antony had not really tied himself to Cleopatra by this point as he would later OTL.)

So we might have a new "lead citizen" of the Roman Empire who has very little interest in managing state affairs, perfectly content to let the republican traditions that governed the state until recently reassert themselves. What do you guys think?
I doubt the Republic would come back for more than a generation or two. By that point it had been falling to pieces for generations. Most likely Antony takes power through the argument of having a lot of people with stabby things that follow his orders. Most likely rather than bothering with maintaining the facade of the Republic like Octavian he'd be declared dictator for life like Sulla. His rule would likely result in much the same, he'd be the absolute power in his lifetime, which he'd use to prosecute a few wars (Parthia being his first target), then when he died the "Republic" would reassert itself for a decade or so until someone was able to gain similar fame and power and use it to become the leader of Rome. So the Senate would be nothing more than a place holder that would exist in the brief power vacuums between war lords.
 
I doubt the Republic would come back for more than a generation or two. By that point it had been falling to pieces for generations. Most likely Antony takes power through the argument of having a lot of people with stabby things that follow his orders. Most likely rather than bothering with maintaining the facade of the Republic like Octavian he'd be declared dictator for life like Sulla. His rule would likely result in much the same, he'd be the absolute power in his lifetime, which he'd use to prosecute a few wars (Parthia being his first target), then when he died the "Republic" would reassert itself for a decade or so until someone was able to gain similar fame and power and use it to become the leader of Rome. So the Senate would be nothing more than a place holder that would exist in the brief power vacuums between war lords.

Agreed. The facade of the Republic has been broken.

Ironically, the only way it's coming back is through a absolute dictator who chooses to deliberately restore it. And lasts long enough to make it happen, properly. Would most likely involve whole-scale slaughter of noble families (proscriptions) and an almost total rewrite of the laws.
 
Agreed. The facade of the Republic has been broken.

Ironically, the only way it's coming back is through a absolute dictator who chooses to deliberately restore it. And lasts long enough to make it happen, properly. Would most likely involve whole-scale slaughter of noble families (proscriptions) and an almost total rewrite of the laws.
The big issue is how to maintain the edifice of Rome for longer than the dictator's body got cold. Before the Republic was kept alive by nearly religious adherence to republican traditions, and when those were slowly eroded away so was the Republic. Codifying them in laws might work, but given the way the world worked at that time as soon as there was a sufficient cause someone with enough power or military might would just ignore the laws, claim power, and it all goes back to the way it was.
 
Top