WI Clodius did not revolt against Lucullus during the third mithridatic war

Hecatee

Donor
The Third Mithridatic War (75-65 BC) was one of three Mithridatic Wars fought between Mithridates VI of Pontus and the Roman Republic. The Romans won the war, and Mithridates committed suicide, ending the menace of Pontus and conquering the Armenian kingdom.



Mithridates VI had long been a thorn in Rome's side, having been the subject of two wars against the Roman Republic, in the early 1st century BC. In response to the chaos in Rome, following the terror of Marius and Sulla's dictatorship, the Republic was in total disorder.


Launching an attack at the same time as a revolt by Sertorius swept through the Spanish provinces, Mithridates was initially virtually unopposed. The Senate acted, by sending the consul Lucius Licinius Lucullus to deal with the Pontic threat.



The only other reliable general, Pompey, was in Gaul, marching to Hispania to help crush the revolt lead by Sertorius.


Upon his arrival, Lucullus met up with several legions, which had been campaigning in Asia Minor, and marched against Mithridates, by moving east into Armenia, an ally of Mithridates. The veteran Roman legions proved superior in combat against Mithridates' army, which often used outdated weapons like chariots, to try and break through the Roman lines. Advancing deep into Armenia, Lucullus pursued Mithridates and his Armenian ally Tigranes relentlessly, eventually getting carried away with events.



By 69 BC, as he raced for the Caucasus, fresh armies were being created behind him while his soldiers, many serving beyond their required service of twenty years, were growing angry with the endless marches over barren terrain.



This is then in 68 BC that Clodius Pulcher, then a young under officer of Lucullus HQ and Lucullus' brother in law, decided to revolt against Lucullus, forcing him to stop and give command of his armies to Pompey before retiring in his newly built estate in Rome where he would live a life of pleasures and philosophy due to permanent political opposition.



Here comes my POD : what would have happened if Clodius had not organized a revolt and Lucullus had won the war all by himself, causing Mithridate to commit suicide ?

We would then have had one more big player in the 60's BC, one man with huge prestige from his victory in the east who would have severely controlled the publicans in the province of Asia, would have annexed Pontus and Armenia, eventually clashing with Parthia over that last issue, but also Pompey would not have meddled in the affairs of Syria Palestinia as he did and would not have gathered the huge supports he had in the area during the civil war against Caesar...

In fact with another major player in the area until 56 BC would the first triumvirate have happened at all, and would Caesar have been able to get his special command in Gaul ? Would Pompey have been given the command of the war against the Pirates in 67 ?

So what do you all think ?
 

Hecatee

Donor
Let's take a more organized view at the situation in the 60's and 50's at Rome to see what would change had a fourth player been in the area at the period.

First we need to look at Lucullus political orientation in order to now what he would do and who he would support :

- 67 : Lucullus win the final battle against Mithridates in the East and stays there to settle the area when Ostia is attacked by pirates who kidnap some roman magistrates and plunder the port. Pompey is given command of the war against the pirates with enormous resources and a command that extend to any land within 50 miles of the sea. This is partly on the province given to Lucullus and both men clash when Pompey negotiate with a pirate town that Lucullus was besieging. Publicans and Pompey's follower attempt to deprive Lucullus of his command but fail due to the enormous publicity of Lucullus following his victory.
- 66 : Pompey makes a new attempt at taking command over Lucullus with the lex Manilla, supported by Cicero. But this law also fails, making Pompey very angry. During this time Lucullus capture Tigranes of Armenia despite forces sent to help him by the Parthian Empire. The veteran legions of Lucullus, some of the men under arms since the time of Sulla's first Mithridatic war more than 15 years before, made short order of the Parthians heavy cavalry which had been force to fight in unfavorables conditions.
- 65 : Lucullus meets with Antiochus XIII Asiaticus but seeing that the old Seleucid Empire was dying he decides to annex it simply, making it a province of the roman republic. He does the same to the other small nations of the area including Judea. He also receive an embassy from the Parthian king, signing a treaty fixing the border of the two empires on the Euphrate river.

- 64 : Lucullus goes back to Rome to celebrate a triumph but the partisans of Pompey delay it as much as possible with interminable debates in the Senate. Finally he does hold his triumph. Pompey does also triumph that year for his victory over the pirates but it does not have the luxury of Lucullus' who is now the richest man in Rome with Crassus.

- 63 : Cicero's consulate and Catiline conspiracy. Lucullus argue that the law must be upheld and that none can be killed without process, but it is finally Caesar's discourse which sway the Senate. In the end it does not matter because the conjurate are tried and sentenced to death anyway thanks to the oratorial skills of the Consul. Birth of Octavius.

- 62 : Scandal of the Bona Dea. Lucullus severs all ties with Clodius and gets closer to Caesar

- 61 : Caesar goes to Spain, his creditor repaid by funds advanced by both Crassus and Lucullus who both want to promote his career to make an obstacle to Pompey. Caesar's daughter Julia is married to Lucullus as a guaranty. Pompey is more and more isolated since the most conservative elements of the Senate do not want of him.

- 60 : Caesar conquer Lusitania and got gold enough to repay a good deal of his debts and plan for his consulte, thus saving his career.

- 59 : Following his victories in Spain and Lusitania Caesar his easily elected to the consulate but with a ultra-conservative Bibulus as colleague who soon retreat in his home after being humiliated, which makes Lucullus uneasy.

- 58 : Clodius fails to be elected tribune and resort to mob violence to perturb the state while his enemies fund Milo. Caesar gets a special command for Gaul and Illyria thanks to Crassus' money despite Lucullus misgivings and Pompey's opposition ( Lucullus does nothing to stop Caesar and Pompey is not rich enough )

- 56 : Lucullus dies of old age while Caesar keeps winning battles in Gaul.

- 55 : Crassus and Pompey got elected consuls despite the opposition of the conservatives, but they keep fighting during the whole year and finally decides that neither will take a proconsulate the next year.

- 54 : Caesar's second expedition to Britain, beginning of the construction of Pompey's theater

- 53 : Vercingetorix' rising

- 52 : Pompey allies with the conservative who sees him as the only way to stop Caesar and Crassus : they try to pass a law preventing Caesar to stand for the consulate of 49 in abstentia but fail due to massive lobbying by Crassus. During this time Caesar is in Alesia besieging Vercingetorix' army. Clodius, close ally of Pompey, is killed during a fight with Milo and the conservative lose control of his network in the plebs.

- 51 : Death of Crassus from old age. Pompey seize the opportunity to retry his attempt at passing a law forbidding Caesar's candidacy in abstentia and this time the law passes.

More to follow
 
I think at that point in time, what Caesar / Octavian did was destined to happen - the change from military leaders leveraging their successes into temporary power to a situation where somebody would not relinquish the power and establish a dynasty.

Having one more player around might have changed when this happened and who established the dynasty, and maybe the constitutional structure (balance between senatorial rule and emperor's rule, etc.) would have been different, but the general outcome would have been the same - I assume that by the 1st century AD, Rome would be ruled by a strongman's dynasty in any case. Of course, there's a lot of butterflies here; the expansion may have gone differently (maybe no or a later conquest of Gaul and Britain), etc., so beyod that, it's hard to say how history would have developed.
 

Hecatee

Donor
I'm far from certain that the empire would be born because most republican commanders did not see the value of the provinces : for them they were lands to pillage during their tour of duty as is shown by their treatment of Asia or Africa. Lucculus had understood this and Caesar felt it but it took Augustus and his team to understand it and apply a different management strategy. Their were more chances of massive revolts against Rome than they were of formation of the empire we know
 
I'm far from certain that the empire would be born because most republican commanders did not see the value of the provinces : for them they were lands to pillage during their tour of duty as is shown by their treatment of Asia or Africa. Lucculus had understood this and Caesar felt it but it took Augustus and his team to understand it and apply a different management strategy. Their were more chances of massive revolts against Rome than they were of formation of the empire we know
The empire was mostly there even before Caesar - he just added Gaul and (followed up by Octavianus) Egypt. Perhaps Gaul wouldn't have been a priority in an ATL, but a rich and weak country like Egypt would have been on Rome's menu sooner or later.
With a strongman established in Rome, whoever he was, he would not have needed to hand out the colonies as spoils for Roman politicians to replete their coffers after ruining themselves in their year of holding their respective elected office; he would use them as basis for his own patronage, which would have made him interested in their longer-term well-being.
The late Roman Republic survived massive civil wars for about hundred years without the empire breaking up. There were revolts, but they were all regionally limited, allowing the Republic to put them down one by one - I wouldn't see why a change in personnel should have changed the situation fundamentally.
 
Top