Livia killed everyone theory is not like, that plausible....
I mean, Marcellus at best is a maybe.
Last edited:
Best Roman Emperors that never were?
- Thread starter Blair
- Start date
I mean, Marcellus at best is a maybe.
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
It may help to just try and list people who, at one point or another, were de jure or de facto Heirs to the Roman Empire, or figures who challenged for the title, but for one reason or another never made it. So starting at the beginning:
- Augustus -- Marcellus, Agrippa, and the sons of Agrippa
- Tiberius -- Germanicus, Drusus the Younger, Nero Germanicus (and/or Sejanus, kind of), and finally Gemellus
- Caligula -- earlier civil war, likely; take your pick of candidates
- Claudius -- Brittanicus
- Nero -- Piso (already been mentioned)
- Flavian dynasty -- Titus Flavius brothers?
- Nerva -- Crassus Frugi (conspirator), Maternus (rival to Trajan)
- Trajan -- Lucius Neratius Priscus
- Hadrian -- Lucius Aelius
Last edited:
I think this is an important What if? Germanicus seems to be THE GUY during Tiberius' reign.
AIUI Hadrian adopted Lucius Verus and Marcus Aurelian first, but realized that they were too young and adopted Anonious Pius, so long as Antonius Pius adopted Lucius and Marcus...
Everyone generally wanks the Komnenoi after this...
Hell, Basil Bulgar Slayer or even one of the Leo's is regarded as someone who could unite East and West at this point - figuratively speaking
Gaius and Lucius?
Ah yes, according to the Livia Killed Everyone Theory she teleported to the exact location they both were and killed them. One by spear and one by plague? 😁
Perhaps John Komnenos, brother of Isaac I Komnenos, who was offered the throne when Isaac was about to retire but declined, reportedly even after his wife, Anna Dalassena, begged him to accept. I don’t think he would have necessarily been "great", his wife might even be the real power behind the throne just as she was with Alexios IOTL, and preventing Doukid incompetence and butterflying away Manzikert would at least qualify him as a decent emperor, I think.
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
Drusus the Younger was considered his peer (just as Drusus the Elder was considered Tiberius’ peer when the later was alive); personally, I think the son of Tiberius had more well-rounded potential as an Emperor.
Initially, I thought maybe having Commodus getting assassinated early (in the plot of 182) would set this up real nice, but apparently there are disagreements there:
Pretty sure who Stilicho would be allowed to rule Rome as his mother was a Roman citizen and he was married to Theodosius‘s niece and adoptive daughter… at the worst if Honorius died early and Stilicho would NOT be allowed to rule in his own right is likely who he would marry his son to Galla Placidia, as was planned, and rule in name of his son…
Romans had a weird notion for rulers that they accepted half barbarians as rulers if the mother was the barbarian see the son of Justinian II, or Leo the khazar but its a big no no for the father being a barbarian
You are sure? Still Stilicho had most likely always seen himself only as a Roman… in any case if Stilicho can not rule in his own name he could surely do it in name of his son, specially if the boy married Galla Placidia (say who Honorius died in 407 instead of Maria)…
the idea was that the father of said child would become emperor, assuming he married the empress, and hence no, we cant have a Basileus who is a barbarian but even when that was not the case for in fact I dare say people got more tolerant after late antiquity for example Leo the khazar from what I remeber really did not get any wrong for his herratige but compare that to zeno,despite Isauria being part of the empire for centuries by this point zeno was seen as 'internal barbarian" because that how the viewed Isaurians
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
Going by my previous list -- I have to say, between the ascension of Vespasian and the reign of Antonius Pius, none of the "heirs who didn't succeed, "could-have-been-heirs", or "conspirators for the throne" seem particularly impressive compared to what we got OTL. In the immediate aftermath -- I also think there's a good chance Tiberius Claudius Pompeianus becomes Emperor if Commodus is killed in 182, though I realize that's a disputed point; he'd be a far improvement if he did step in, in any event. If we're looking at immediately prior, then we'd be looking at alternatives to Nero -- and of those that could have succeeded instead of him (Brittanicus) and alternative men who could have replaced him, I'd say Gaius Calpurnicus Piso is the most promising by far.
Now, as mentioned, the assassination of Caligula producing a different Emperor is a bit of chaotic scenario, so put that aside -- and that just leaves men who could have succeeded Augustus or Tiberius (at least if we focus on the era before Marcus Aurelius' death). And of those two lists, I'd say the two most interesting scenarios are Augustus dying of his illness in 23 BC and being succeeded by Agrippa, and Drusus the Younger killing Sejanus and eventually succeeding his father.
So I guess my four picks from the Pax Romana Period period would be -- Agrippa, Drusus, Piso, and Pompeianus. (Seeing as I don't really see much in the way of untapped potential in the Severan Dynasty, and the Crisis Period saw just about everyone who could have been Emperor getting a shot, I'd say that list would pretty much cover the Principate.)
Now, as mentioned, the assassination of Caligula producing a different Emperor is a bit of chaotic scenario, so put that aside -- and that just leaves men who could have succeeded Augustus or Tiberius (at least if we focus on the era before Marcus Aurelius' death). And of those two lists, I'd say the two most interesting scenarios are Augustus dying of his illness in 23 BC and being succeeded by Agrippa, and Drusus the Younger killing Sejanus and eventually succeeding his father.
So I guess my four picks from the Pax Romana Period period would be -- Agrippa, Drusus, Piso, and Pompeianus. (Seeing as I don't really see much in the way of untapped potential in the Severan Dynasty, and the Crisis Period saw just about everyone who could have been Emperor getting a shot, I'd say that list would pretty much cover the Principate.)
Last edited:
I don’t think he’s advocating that. Just that they could have been the best option to succeed Augustus, and the man himself thought so.
On that note, I wonder what Nero Claudius succeeding with Tiberius as a co-emperor would have done.
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
More the simple fact that they were Augustus' heirs until they either died young (in the case of Gaius and Lucius) or fell from favor and got exiled (in the case of Postumus); the list being referred to isn't "men who would have been good emperors" so much as it's "men who didn't become emperor, but had a reasonable shot of doing so".
Do you mean Drusus the Elder (Tiberius' brother)? Thing is, I put him on the list mainly because Agrippa's sons were young when their dad died, and had to think who else would Augustus turn to if, for example, he died early and his grandsons needed a "regent"? Tiberius himself was probably the top choice for much of their minority, but for a few years there (12-9 BC) I'd say his younger brother's star was shining brighter, so realistically he had to be considered.
Obviously, if Drusus the Elder lives longer, we have to think again about how that butterflies the fates of Agrippa's sons; also remember, Tiberius was still married to Julia following her second husbands death, and is the older brother on top of that, so it's a bit more complicated than just having Drusus live longer and then get imperial power in a few years.
My thought was more that if Drusus lived longer, but the two sons of Agrippa still died, then Augustus would leave both Tiberius and Nero Claudius both in power. Rather than Tiberius alone.
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
Well, Julia's banishment for adultery came seven years after the death of her brother-in-law;* the death of her two elder sons came within the next five years after that; and then, on top of that, Postumus still had to get banished a couple of years after that. Not only would we have to imagine how Drusus' career develops in all this time, and how it continues to compare to his elder brother, but we need to think of why Augustus would decide Tiberius needs a co-ruler to begin with.
If we're being honest, Drusus the Elder is more of an x-factor than a "could-have-been-emperor" in his own right; like I said earlier, it's a bit more complicated than "Drusus lives longer, time passes, then princep".
*EDIT ADD: Actually, now that I think of it, wouldn't his brother being alive mean that Tiberius is quite possibly in a different place, mentally, than he was OTL? That could have implications for how his marital issues play out.
Last edited:
Remember also who Tiberius choose to go in self-exile in Rhodes in 6 BC aka three years after Drusus’ death… I can not see this choice changing with Drusus still alive as was dictated by Tiberius unhappiness with his personal life but Drusus‘ survival could very well mean who Tiberius who remain on Rhodes for the remaining of his life (or at least until Augustus‘s death) while Drusus would be put forward as regent first and heir later without any need to call back Tiberius
Last edited:
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
Honestly, I'm not even sure Tiberius goes into self-imposed exile TTL; if Drusus doesn't die in 9 BC, then it stands to reason he remains Governor of Germania Inferior (and in charge of those legions), meaning Tiberius doesn't step in from summer 9 BC through 8 BC. Assuming the elder brother still serves again as Consul, as he did OTL in 7 BC (and I don't see why he wouldn't), he'd probably be looking to follow it up with a solid governorship somewhere (maybe following up his brother in Germania, maybe going to Syria, etc) -- in part because since his brother's alive, he doesn't have as much pain (for which he can fail to bury in work), and partly because he didn't have to step into his brother's shoes in Germania (so he hasn't tried burying what pain he does have with that kind of work yet). That actually keeps him busy up to circa 2 BC easily enough.
Drusus, for his part, can't stay in Germania forever -- he'll probably leave at the start of (his brother's consulship year of) 7 BC, or possibly 6 BC, or 5 BC at the very latest -- and technically speaking he can't be consul again until 3 BC (since he's already been consul in 9 BC). So he actually needs something to do around this time -- maybe Tiberius could step into Germnia following his second consulship. and Drusus can step into being governor somewhere else (maybe Syria)? It's worth noting that around this time, these two brothers, along with Ahenobarbus (Antonia Major's husband) and Varus (yes, that Varus), are probably the only people Augustus is going to be putting in charge of important provinces with multiple legions to command.
By the time we get to the point where OTL, Tiberius' marital issues were throwing the imperial family into scandal, we've got a context TTL that is potentially very different.
Last edited:
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
Just so everyone knows -- I went and took the Drusus the Elder debate, and made a new thread for it.
I was thinking this myself, the man would have made an able emperor, may not have been the youngest, so say the piso conspiracy works and Corbulo is placed on the throne, he may only rule for 10 years but could have been a good 10 years and seeing as how he has only daughters, either he adopts someone else to become his hier or he names a son in law/grandson hier. To boot his daughters were also distant descendants of Augustus.