Posts: 186
Threads: 43
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation:
0
Salve!
What is Vespatian had been killed in Gallilea, or Caesar had not survived his conquest of Gaul?
How different do you think history would have been?
"There are some who call me... Tim..."
Sic vis pacem, para bellum
Exitus acta probat
Nemo saltat sobrius
Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori
Fortes Fortuna Aduvat
"The enemy outnumber us a paltry three to one! Good odds for any Greek!"
If Caesar had been killed in Alesia, Pompeius would have taken this command and finished the job, I'm sure.
Posts: 4,029
Threads: 90
Joined: May 2005
Reputation:
0
I will agree with Reiner on Cesar.
At the time the roman system was producing enough capable men to handle things.
I am not so sure that in the time of Vespasian the systme could make up the loss of good men.
Kind regards
Posts: 8,090
Threads: 505
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation:
0
Quote:I am not so sure that in the time of Vespasian the systme could make up the loss of good men.
Perhaps Vespasian's legions would have just followed Titus, himself a capable leader?
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Posts: 15,116
Threads: 415
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation:
78
I agree with Jim about Titus taking over. However, would Titus have become Emperor? Probably not.
I doubt that Pompeius would have taken over. First of all, the legions would most probably have withdrawn to their camps. Depending on an able general preventing a defeat in the ubiquitous counterattack by Vercingetorix, all would have depended on the Senate appointing Pompeius (he was already powerful, would they have trusted him also with a conquest of Gaul?), and Caesar's legions following him.
It could be argued that Caesar's conquests would have been lost until after some years, another man, unknown to our history, would have followed the same path. I think the Roman conquest of Gaul was inevitable, but the events leading to the development of the Principate are quite another matter. Would the Senate have survived as most powerful entity?
