Will Ptolemaic Egypt Survive if Antony died in Parthia in 36 BC?

[Tonifranz]

Assume that Antony dies in Parthia in 36 BC.

That means Octavian becomes master of the Roman World five years ahead of schedule.

Cleopatra of course would submit as a good client queen to Octavian to keep her throne and send him tributes, bribes to get on his good side.

But then, there is Caesarion.

Anyway, could Egypt survive as a client state in this scenario? Or would Octavian invade Egypt to get rid of Caesarion?

Another question. Say that afterwards, Caesarion got sick and died after Antony's death.

Will Egypt be invaded or would it remain a client kingdom?

 

[MrGreyOwl]

Egypt would remain a client kingdom, similar to Thracia or Mauretania. Easier to manage this way. Rome would only annex a client in case of trouble, or if the local ruler turned foolish enough to rebel openly.

Caesarion could be seen as a threat, but if Antony dies in 36, he may never be recognized as Caesar's heir. It was Antony who pushed for that recognition to counter Octavian's legitimacy. Cleopatra, all by herself, would probably be wise enough to not bring up the subject.

Even if he was already officially recognized as Caesar's natural son, he would have no support in Rome anyway. If he's worth dealing with, there are some interesting ways if Cleopatra is willing to play ball; including Octavian adopting him: he's technically a Roman citizen, I think, although that would be politically risky and unprecedented.

Long story short, Caesarion is really a minor problem in a "Antony dies early" scenario.

 

[Sertorius126]

It would probably get annexed during the Principate, and Cesarion wasn’t really that much of a threat, no Roman would have rallied behind the son of a foreign ruler, so once Egypt is annexed, he’ll be executed right there and then as IOTL. Also, Cesarion wasn’t a Roman citizen, he was never officially recognized as such.

 

[MrGreyOwl]

Also, Cesarion wasn’t a Roman citizen, he was never officially recognized as such.

In theory he could be because he's the son of a Roman citizen, in practice I agree nobody in Rome would have taken that claim seriously.

 

[isabella]

It would probably get annexed during the Principate, and Cesarion wasn’t really that much of a threat, no Roman would have rallied behind the son of a foreign ruler, so once Egypt is annexed, he’ll be executed right there and then as IOTL. Also, Cesarion wasn’t a Roman citizen, he was never officially recognized as such.

Caesarion was a Roman citizen as both his parents had that citizenship but being a member of a foreign royal dynasty is unlikely who Romans would have followed him

 

[Sertorius126]

In theory he could be because he's the son of a Roman citizen, in practice I agree nobody in Rome would have taken that claim seriously.

Not everybody believed he was the son of a Roman citizen, Augustan propaganda depicts him as the son of one of Cleopatra’s servants, and that was the official version of things, which Antony unsuccessfully tried to contest.

 

[jocay]

Rome primarily annexed client states when they figured that direct rule is more important than having a middle-man in charge. Next to North Africa, Egypt was an important source of the grain that fed the Roman population. Disregarding Caesarion, Egypt is too important to allow to remain under Mark Anthony's influence and when the civil war arises, Octavian would immediately move his armies to capture Egypt. Not to mention that Ptolemaic Egypt has been plagued with so much instability and infighting that someone like Octavian would prefer to extinguish any pretense of independence and keep Egypt for himself. Egypt is toast no matter what, barring a sudden and complete collapse of Rome, and Caesarion's days are numbered so long as Octavian is alive.

 

[Lalli]

In theory he could be because he's the son of a Roman citizen, in practice I agree nobody in Rome would have taken that claim seriously.

There is not any clear evidence that Caesarion was Julius Caesar's son. He never recognised that and such claim was created by Antony several years after Caesar's assassination. Even I am bit sceptical with such claim. Julia was only known descendant of Julius Caesar when he was alive despite that he was known as womaniser.

And for question: Egypt probably would remain independent if then:

1. Egypt rises against Roman Empire.
2. There is some such serious troubles that annexation is only option.
3. Ptolemy Dynasty go extinction (most plausible way).

 

[Fabius Maximus]

But then, there is Caesarion.

Anyway, could Egypt survive as a client state in this scenario? Or would Octavian invade Egypt to get rid of Caesarion?

I don't think Caesarion would have been much of a factor one way or the other. The Romans of this period displayed a curious mix of open-mindedness and xenophobia: they were happy to copy foreign ideas that worked well and to accept assimilated foreigners into the citizenship, but the idea of being under the rule of a foreigner (which is what Caesarion would have been considered, even supposing he was actually Julius Caesar's illegitimate son) was completely anathema to them. Hence, for example, why Octavian's propaganda emphasised Cleopatra's role in the civil war, portraying Anthony as a drunken wastrel totally under her thumb. Whilst he could be ruthless when he felt that circumstances called for it, Octavian wasn't bloodthirsty, and seems to have preferred either co-opting enemies or stripping them of power rather than killing them. Had Anthony and Cleopatra not pushed Caesarion's claim as Julius Caesar's heir, which happened after the POD, I expect Octavian would have just sent Caesarion into comfortable exile in an estate somewhere in Italy where he couldn't do any harm.

 

[Sertorius126]

I don't think Caesarion would have been much of a factor one way or the other. The Romans of this period displayed a curious mix of open-mindedness and xenophobia: they were happy to copy foreign ideas that worked well and to accept assimilated foreigners into the citizenship, but the idea of being under the rule of a foreigner (which is what Caesarion would have been considered, even supposing he was actually Julius Caesar's illegitimate son) was completely anathema to them. Hence, for example, why Octavian's propaganda emphasised Cleopatra's role in the civil war, portraying Anthony as a drunken wastrel totally under her thumb. Whilst he could be ruthless when he felt that circumstances called for it, Octavian wasn't bloodthirsty, and seems to have preferred either co-opting enemies or stripping them of power rather than killing them. Had Anthony and Cleopatra not pushed Caesarion's claim as Julius Caesar's heir, which happened after the POD, I expect Octavian would have just sent Caesarion into comfortable exile in an estate somewhere in Italy where he couldn't do any harm.

I actually disagree, after all he had Alexander Helios disappear right after he came to Italy, I believe he would have done the same with Cesarion. The only real potential enemy he stripped of power and left to live was Lepidus, and that’s because he was totally worthless.

 

[ImperialxWarlord]

With Mark Antony dead Egypt’s time as an independent nation could probably be counted on one hand, it was too important for Octavian to let it remain independent. He’d probably take the peaceful route and have them become a client kingdom of Rome and have a few Roman legions stationed there to...keep the peace. This would probably go on until the rulers became too rowdy or Rome decided it didn’t want to have to deal with middle men anymore, which ever came first.

So long as no one tries use caesarion being Caesar’s son against Octavian (I do believe he was Caesar’s son) then I don’t think he’d do anything to him. Octavian doesn’t strike me as the type of guy who’d kill someone without a good reason, since no Roman would ever think about supporting caesarion he wouldn’t have reason to kill him. Although I could see Octavian telling cleopatra that he wouldn’t be allowed to inherit Egypt and would have to pass the throne onto Alexander Helios.

 

[Alex Zetsu]

Caesarion could be seen as a threat, but if Antony dies in 36, he may never be recognized as Caesar's heir.

The Romans never recognized out of wedlock marriage. If a married woman bore a "suspicious" son, the father had a right to kill a suspect child. If he allowed it to live a few months after birth/ whenever he knew his wife gave birth, the law was that he was the father and that was the end of the story. If a woman had an affair with a married man and gave birth, she could expect no material from the father and was expected to depose of the child if she lacked her own means to take care of it (usually VERY poor since bread was subsidized so it wouldn't take much wealth to raise one). On the flipside, an adopted son had the full rights of a natural child. Roman law was simple, Caearion was Cleopatra's child whose father is completely irrelevant since she wasn't married to a Roman and Octavian was Caesar's true heir.