[What would have become of Octavian?]

By the by, I don't really see a basis for Brutus being seen as an heir over Octavian. He could've been named in the actual will but he wasn't.

 

Which Brutus? Decimus Brutus was named in Caesar's will.

 

Also, it's useful to consider an option not listed: Caesar is defeated by the Parthians and joins Crassus in the afterlife.

Caesar would have defeated the Parthians I think. He would have been away at war for fivew years or so. During this time Octavian would have been in the east with Caesar and Caesar would have better groomed him to succeed him. It is very clear at this point that Octavian was the heir. Mark Antony would have been sent against the Dacians and one wonders whether or not he would have had success. Brutus was no military man. Octavian and Agrippa get much needed seasoning during the Parthian campaign.

[Nobiles in the Caesarian Civil War]

If Caesar woulkd have stood trial he would have went down. Pompey, Cato and the Caecilli Metelli where just too powerful. Pompey was motivated by personal reasons such as that Caesar had taken away the mantle "First Man in Rome" from him. Pompey, Cato and all the rest would have stacked the jury, and bribed heavily to ensure Caesar was convited.

In HBO forum, I often engage in debate with a Caesar supporter defending Optimates, and here I often find myself defending Caesar. I'm afraid I'm going to develop split personality.

 

Anyway, while I find Cato's list of nobiles very illuminating, I still think that Caesar was not entirely wrong to assume that his goose would be cooked if he returned Rome a private citizen. Although Senate obviously wanted to compromise with Caesar, Cato and Optimate leaders were very successful in pursuing their hardline policy toward Caesar, overcoming Senate's own preference.

I agree with Pompeius that the overall clientele influence of Pompey and Optimate leaders combined would have been more significant factor in the trial than actual number of Caesar's partisans and opponents. Moreover, as Caesar pondered the prospect of trial, he probably would have had in mind the fate of Gracchi more than that of Scipio.

 

Like Pompeius said, Roman politics was largely personal with some occasionally significant injection of ideology (though I wouldn't say that it was personal jealousy that motviateed Optimates). The consulars would have far greater influence in terms of cliente and amicitia than lower-ranking senators, and I think Caesar's supporters were generally lower-ranking senators of younger generation.

[A Poll on the Best Roman Generals]

For the purposes of this answer I will confine my list to those generals who fought from the Second Punic War to the end of the Republic.

 

1. Gaius Julius Caesar

2. Scipio Africanus

3. Gaius Marius

4. Quintus Sertorius

5. Lucius Cornelius Sulla

6. Lucius Licinius Lucullus

7. Scipio Aemilianus

8. Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius

9. Lucius Aemilius Paulus

10. Marcus Porcius Cato (Censor)

11. Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa

12. Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus

13. Marcus Antonius

[A Poll on the Best Roman Generals]

Republic -

 

1. Gaius Iulius Caesar (the Dictator)

2. Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus (Maior)

3. Gaius Marius

4. Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus Africanus Numantinus

5. Lucius Cornelius Sylla "Felix"

6. Quintus Sertorius

7. Gnaeus Pompeius "Magnus"

8. Quintus Fabius Maximus Rullianus

9. Manius Curius Dentatus

10. Lucius Papirius Corsur

11. Marcus Claudius Marcelus (2nd Punic War)

12. Lucius Aemilius Paullus Macedonicus

 

Empire (not ranked) -

 

Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa , Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo , Marcus Ulpius Traianus (Trajan) , Marcus Aurelius , Lucius Domitius Aurelianus , Flavius Valerius Constantinus , Flavius Aetius , Flavius Stilicho , Flavius Belisarius

 

[edited out the humor for the sake of legitimacy=PP]

That is a good list but i dispute number 4 and number 7. Scipio Aemilianus was a good organizer and a good by the book general but truly his campaigns were nothing outstanding. He took over sieges where the enemy was already besieged. Therefore he would be down the list. Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus is extremely overrated. In Spain Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius did alot more to defeat Sertorius then Pompey ever did. Lucius Licinius Lucullus is not even on the list. I would rate him right up there with Sulla and Sertorius. He ran rings around Mithridates and Tigranes despite being heavily outnumbered. Lucullus and Metellus definitely rate ahead of Pompey. The only fault with Lucullus is that his men did not like him.

[A Poll on the Best Roman Generals]

Republic -

 

1. Gaius Iulius Caesar (the Dictator)

2. Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus (Maior)

3. Gaius Marius

4. Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus Africanus Numantinus

5. Lucius Cornelius Sylla "Felix"

6. Quintus Sertorius

7. Gnaeus Pompeius "Magnus"

8. Quintus Fabius Maximus Rullianus

9. Manius Curius Dentatus

10. Lucius Papirius Corsur

11. Marcus Claudius Marcelus (2nd Punic War)

12. Lucius Aemilius Paullus Macedonicus

 

Empire (not ranked) -

 

Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa , Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo , Marcus Ulpius Traianus (Trajan) , Marcus Aurelius , Lucius Domitius Aurelianus , Flavius Valerius Constantinus , Flavius Aetius , Flavius Stilicho , Flavius Belisarius

 

[edited out the humor for the sake of legitimacy=PP]

That is a good list but i dispute number 4 and number 7. Scipio Aemilianus was a good organizer and a good by the book general but truly his campaigns were nothing outstanding. He took over sieges where the enemy was already besieged. Therefore he would be down the list. Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus is extremely overrated. In Spain Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius did alot more to defeat Sertorius then Pompey ever did. Lucius Licinius Lucullus is not even on the list. I would rate him right up there with Sulla and Sertorius. He ran rings around Mithridates and Tigranes despite being heavily outnumbered. Lucullus and Metellus definitely rate ahead of Pompey. The only fault with Lucullus is that his men did not like him.

[Corona]

Where do you keep pulling these great pictures from Pertinax???

 

 

In 80BC Caesar won the corona civica for saving another roman's life at the storming of Mitylene,

anybody know of any other famous recipiants of these prestigious awards?

 

 

Gaius Marius was supposed to have won the civic crown 3 times. The civic crown was only won for exceptional valour. The grass crown was very rarely won. Winners of the Grass Crown were Publius Decimus Mus, Scipio Africanus, Quintus Fabius Maximus Cuncator, Quintus Sertorius, Lucius Cornelius Sulla and a Gaius Fonteius. Under Sulla's laws, any winner of a grass or civic crown was adlected automatically to the senate. Which indicates even the civic was rarely won. Caesar won the civic becaue he reportedly saved a cohort thru his valour. Becauseof this he became a senator at age 20.

[What if the Roman Republic was invaded by Alexander the Great?]

I think the Roman legions would have been victorious. Afterall the legions defeated the Macedonian phalanx three times: Cynestophale, Magnesia and Pydna. The phalanx was very vulnerable to the roman swords once they were outflanked.

[Battle of Philippi]

They probably would have proceeded onto Italy, marched on Rome, and restored the Republic under their protection. Cassius was a decent general who eventually could have emerged from this as emperor if he were so desirous.

[what part of the army would you be in?]

I would probably be in the infantry and fight in the front line. I am very strong, brave and also possess good leadership skills. In time I would ( if i lived) i would become a centurion than work my way up the centurion ranks. If I was in the noble classes I would still fight in the infantry and be a vir militaris. Great way to build my political career, as well as earn the respect and admiration of my fellow soldiers. The army was the best way to build a powerbase.