If...

[laklak]

If it hadn't been for Willie The Bastard Mrs. Lak would have been a Breton instead of a Geordie.

[Svartalf]

Thanks for making my point.

[macdoc]

I don't get you... how does preventing the Varrus disaster (assuming you kill Arminius before he can start his German revolt) prevent the extension of chretinity?

Read the book. It's well laid out as to the reason.

[Cormac]

Rather than a potential target for a bullet purely in order to make the world a better place, I'd be fascinated to see how the world would have ended up if Julius Caesar hadn't crossed the Rubicon.

As an explanation, Caesar's return from gaul with his army (and crossing the river Rubicon with them) started the conflict that saw the end of the Roman Republic, replaced with the Roman Empire. The chain of events that was caused by that one action had a major impact on the flow of history that we're still living with.

No Emperor Constantine, so Christianity remains a fringe Middle Eastern religion? No Islam?

It would be an interesting alternative universe.

So, yeah... Julius Caesar... back-and-to-the-left, back-and-to-the-left, back-and-to-the-left...

I think the Roman Republic was already doomed. The "Res" of the "Public" was already the controlled plaything of a small super-rich elite who used their money and their prestige to contro access to public office, and to play the popular emotion for their own political ends.

If Julius Caesar had balked at the Rubicon, his rivals would have ultimately assassinated him anyway, and someone else would have adopted the purple.

Yep, but with C Julius Caesar eliminated before he could be the major leader he became, there's no inheritance of his to dispute, and no opportunity for Octavian to become Augustus. Probably not even conquest of Palestine, which remains in the Herods' hands and chretinity possibly never really arises.

Arguably, the Republic was over before the First Triumvirate (Crassus, Pompey, and Caesar), which itself predated Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon.



Octavian is really an after-effect.

[Svartalf]

Without Caesar, Pompey becomes dictator for life, but he was an Optimate, and his provincial background would not let him found the kind of dynasty Caesar did... the Aristocracy would probably turn to a form of oligarchy disenfranchising the plebs and the Roman Empire is stillborn.

[Cormac]

Without Caesar, Pompey becomes dictator for life, but he was an Optimate, and his provincial background would not let him found the kind of dynasty Caesar did... the Aristocracy would probably turn to a form of oligarchy disenfranchising the plebs and the Roman Empire is stillborn.

Either way, the Republic was long over - which is my main point.


We can see what would have happened largely by reference to the history of the Empire after Octavian's death. The duration of each Imperial reign and the overall instability is indicative of the likely path that Rome would have taken had Caesar been killed prior to crossing the Rubicon...

[Svartalf]

Except one thing... the actual establishment of the global Roman Empire and the global establishment of Roman culture... Without Caesar, scientists up to the XIXth century would never have used Latin, we'd all be dominated by Greek culture and whatever history had thrown at us... maybe we'd be tengri worshipping Turks... the events between 25BC and 50AD are completely pivotal to our history and culture.

[Cormac]

Except one thing... the actual establishment of the global Roman Empire and the global establishment of Roman culture... Without Caesar, scientists up to the XIXth century would never have used Latin, we'd all be dominated by Greek culture and whatever history had thrown at us... maybe we'd be tengri worshipping Turks... the events between 25BC and 50AD are completely pivotal to our history and culture.

Well, the Roman Empire, and the Imperial throne are not necessarily dependent on each other. Rome had done well enough extending its borders. There is no reason to consider that it wouldn't have continued to expand for the near future...

Tell you what - we'd not have had that wanker Patrick come over here preaching. He'd have just shut up and herded sheep as a slave for his master.

[Svartalf]

I think they are. Without the strong, Urbs centric administration set up by Augustus, there's no way the Roman Empire would have lasted long enough to be more than a footnote in history books...

Not to mention that chretinity would never have developed as it did outside the frame of Rome, or some similar Judaea dominating foreign power.

[macdoc]

One of the events that the book I mentioned covers very well is what would have happened if the javelin had not missed Alexander.
The cascade of potential megashifts in history was quite remarkable for a twenty something.

[Feck]

I think I would shoot Saul/ Paul on the Damascus road.

[Red Celt]

I think I would shoot Saul/ Paul on the Damascus road.

Hey, that's what I said... copy cat.

[Red Celt]

Without Caesar, Pompey becomes dictator for life, but he was an Optimate, and his provincial background would not let him found the kind of dynasty Caesar did... the Aristocracy would probably turn to a form of oligarchy disenfranchising the plebs and the Roman Empire is stillborn.

Wait, wait, wait, people... the republic (and every Roman) was intrinsically against the idea of kings. That Caesar's adopted son became an emperor was a significantly monumental change in the zeitgeist. Suggesting that Pompey would have somehow become dictator for life is an utter nonsense that can't be drawn from historical facts.

The way that the republic has been described is exactly how the republic had always functioned: power-mongering by an elite few. It wasn't due for a collapse at the time of Caesar - at least, not without Caesar. The empire wasn't just a renaming of the republic; the expansion of Roman power changed completely after Augustus.

[Svartalf]

I never said a monarchy. Caesar was dictator repeatedly, and had actually been made dictator for life.; it is likely that Pompey could have had the same had he not lost.

[Warren Dew]

I'd do Georges Clemenceau in 1918. Britain and the U.S. wanted a more lenient treaty with Germany, but France refused. With a more lenient Treaty of Versailles perhaps the political situation in Wiemar wouldn't have led to the rise of National Socialism.

There would still have been French representation, likely with the same insistence on reparations. Still, good thought.