I’ve been going over written and documentary materials on the histories of Julius Caesar and Augustus, and I’ve been keeping a mental log of how Caesar and Augustus (I know Augustus has the same name as Caesar, but I use these names for simplicity) were similar and different in their leadership styles and impacts on the state.

It goes without saying that Caesar clearly expected great things to come from the then young Octavian, as Caesar made a point to change his will in 45 BC, making Octavian his primary heir and inheritor of 2/3rds of his estate after getting time to take him under his wing in his campaign against the Pompeian holdouts.

That being said, do you believe that Augustus’ specific program of proscriptions, his heavy reliance on Marcus Agrippa, his initial moderation in dealing with the conspirators, and eventual massacre of them, and finally, Augustus’ emphasis on peace and stability over military conquest (given that Augustus signed a peace treaty with Parthia, despite Caesar having wanted to invade it) would have please Caesar? When Augustus asked, “have I played my part in the comedy of life well?”, do you think Caesar would say, “Yes.”?

Based on what we know of Caesar, while we can never fully infer the thoughts of events never to come in his life, I think he would have been satisfied with some reservations. Napoleon wrote that Caesar’s system only worked because of the quality of the man occupying the highest office (that being dictator perpetuo). I think the same thing goes for Augustus. As Nero and Commodus showed, the system had a very difficult time surviving bad princeps. Additionally, I think Caesar would have been disgusted with the proscriptions (given his tendency for clemency), and especially, the barbaric killing of Cicero. I can’t imagine that he would have personally liked Augustus’ decision to kill Caesarion either (although he might have understood it from a political perspective).

A Roman-Egyptian mummy portrait painted on linen depicting a man, dating to 138-192 AD. It was found in Egypt and is on display in the Cleveland Museum of Art in Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

I learned about this bloke from Gibbons and Ammianus Marcellinus, they both make note of him.

This man was of the Anicii gens, the most prominent family in Rome, donors to the church, and the family of both emperors and popes.

One patrician, Sextus Claudius Probus, was incredibly wealthy and owned estates in Gaul, North Africa, Italy, Illyria, etc... this man owned thousands of slaves, had tenant farmers in his lands, and also saw both his sons become consuls at the same time.

The year is 395 also known as the Year of the Consulship of Anicius Probinus & Anicius Hermogenianus Olybrius.

His grandsons were Petronius Maximus and Anicius Olybrius

Sometimes I come across this misconception of late Rome where people think the patricians were just these frumpy men sitting in a mansion all day and had no real impact on imperial policy. That the honestiores of Rome were just sort of 'going with the flow'

But not really, a lot of them were very active.

This was the vast territory of the Roman Empire during the reign of Emperor Claudius.

Born in 10 BC in Lugdunum (modern-day Lyon, France), he was initially denied the throne due to his physical disabilities. Despite his limitations, Claudius was a highly intelligent man, a gifted orator, and a historian, and he eventually ascended to the throne.

He belonged to the gens claudia, was the son of Drusus, and the nephew of (Tiberius). His brother was the general (Germanicus), and his nephew was (Caligula).

Claudius came to power on January 24, 41 AD, after hiding behind a curtain.

From basic research, my understanding is that a senator's son (in the later republic) would join as a tribunus laticlavius in his late teens or early 20s - not so much to gain military experience as to prepare him for the cursus honorum. Equites were more likely to join up for longtime military service. However, was this true for the early and mid-republic period? Was there an era when longterm military service was more expected of the senatorial class?

When you have a post-476 Roman political order existing in central Italy for 2 centuries after the Gothic War, it raises questions at least in my eyes on the functioning of that society.

This was a time where there were Romans living in Ravenna, the Pentapolis, Perugia, Latium, and Naples during the early middle ages. Clearly not medieval Italians, but clearly not ancient Roman Italians either. It's like this transitionary period where there were people still participating in Roman society while their culture and language was slowly forming into what would later be recognized as clearly not Roman anymore (in the sense of "Roman" being a political and societal identity determined by one's interaction with the Roman state and participation with Roman culture).

What do you guys think about the Exarchate? It's not a short flash in the pan. We're talking about 2 centuries of Roman rule existing in central and northern Italy in the early middle ages. What does that entail? What does it mean? How did it operate? What did it still have in common with its Late Roman past, and how much had it now shifted closer towards its medieval Italian future? Thoughts?

I've tried researching this but haven't necessarily found a satisfying answer.

Obviously I'm familiar with encounters like the Battle of Cannae or the Pyrrhic war where an entire legion was wiped out (or several) - but I'm interested to know what the average survival rate was for a typical Roman solider during the late republic/early empire.

I'd love to hear anyone's thoughts who may have knowledge on this.

A while back, I posted a hypothetical about Germanicus (son of the subject of this post) and what things would be like if Augustus had passed over Tiberius entirely, making Germanicus his primary heir.

This question is generally a popular one, so I thought I’d come up with a far less commonly raised hypothetical.

Nero Claudius Drusus, often referred to as “Drusus the Elder”, was born in 38 BC, born quickly after his mother, Livia, already mother to the 4 year old Tiberius, was compelled to divorce her husband, Tiberius Claudius Nero, and marry Octavian.

As stepson to Octavian and son to his wife, Livia, Drusus received an education very similar to that of his older brother Tiberius, educated in the arts of rhetoric, politics, warfare, and most importantly, succession, should Octavian’s desired heirs unexpectedly die or be indisposed.

However, Drusus would never even come close to achieving the height of what Octavian had trained him for, as Drusus, at the age of just 29 in 9 BC, tragically fell off his horse and broke his leg, getting gangrene and dying 30 days after the accident, only living long enough for a surely bereaved Tiberius (who loved Drusus by all accounts) to visit him in his final days. Augustus was clearly deeply affected, as he gave Drusus a state funeral, a eulogy with honors, and burial in the mausoleum of Augustus. Thus, the hand of fate was twisted in such a way to prevent what could have been a great princeps from ever taking power. Drusus’ legacy was quite a remarkable one, however, as his grandson, Caligula, his son, Claudius, and his great-grandson, Nero, would all become princeps long after his death at the hands of the fates.

Regarding Drusus’ military achievements, disposition, reputation with the people, and quite importantly, his relationship with Augustus, Suetonius, in his Lives of the Caesars, said:

2 This Drusus, while holding the offices of quaestor and praetor, was in charge of the war in Raetia and later of that in Germany. He was the first of Roman generals to sail the northern Ocean, and beyond the Rhine with prodigious labour he constructed the huge canals which to this very day are called by his name.⁠3 Even after he had defeated the enemy in many battles and driven them far into the wilds of the interior, he did not cease his pursuit until the apparition of a barbarian woman of greater than
human size, speaking in the Latin tongue, forbade him to push his victory further. 3 For these exploits he received the honour of an ovation⁠ 4 with the triumphal regalia; and immediately after his praetor­ship he became consul and resumed his campaign, but died in his summer camp, which for that reason was given the name of "Accursed." The body was carried by the leading men of the free towns and colonies to Rome,⁠ 5 where it was met and received by the decuries of scribes,⁠ 6 and buried in the campus Martius. But the army reared a monument in his honour, about which the soldiers should make a ceremonial run⁠ 7 each year thereafter on a stated day, which the cities of Gaul were to observe with prayers and sacrifices. The senate, in addition to many other honours, voted him a marble arch adorned with trophies on the Appian Way, and the surname Germanicus for himself and his descendants. 4 It is the general belief that he was as eager for glory as he was democratic ⁠8 by nature; for in addition to victories over the enemy he greatly desired to win the "noble trophies,"⁠ 9 often pursuing the leaders of the Germans all over the field at great personal risk; and he made no secret of his intention of restoring the old-time form of government, whenever he should have the power. 5 ºIt is because of this, I think, that some have made bold to write that he was an object of suspicion to Augustus; that the emperor recalled him from his province, and when he did not obey at once, took him off by poison. This
I have mentioned, rather not to pass it by, than that I think it true or even probable; for as a matter of fact Augustus loved him so dearly while he lived that he always named him joint-heir along with his sons, as he once declared in the senate; and when he was dead, he eulogized him warmly before the people, praying the gods to make his Caesars⁠ 10 like Drusus, and to grant him, when his time came, as glorious a death as they had given that hero. And not content with carving a laudatory inscription on his tomb in verses of his own composition, Augustus also wrote a memoir of his life in prose* *

So, this final part is of great interest to me. While Augustus was said to have respected Tiberius’ military experience and skill, along with his abilities in public administration, it remains apparent that Augustus didn’t really like Tiberius that much as a stepson, at least not in the same way as his grandchildren or Marcellus.

Drusus is different though. He seemed to have a much less gloomy and cynical personality than his older brother, if Suetonius’ account is to be believed. Augustus seemed to genuinely love him, or at the very least grieve his death as a personal loss.

Tacitus only seems to reinforce these sentiments from a quick glance at his Annales.

As such, while it is perhaps improper to make such hasty conclusions, I’d imagine that, had Drusus not suffered such an inglorious fate, that Augustus would have left Tiberius to sulk in Rhodes, choosing instead to elevate his younger brother to become co-imperator, and eventually his successor, with Germanicus succeeding him.

Perhaps the Julio-Claudian Dynasty would have lasted longer if this alternate fate came to pass. I’m interested in other perspectives.

Just as in Latin America there exists the Inca Trail in Peru, which is a historical route used by the Incas to travel between cities that can be traversed over several days, does there exist in Italy a similar route that consists exclusively of Roman roads? A route where, much like on the Inca Trail, one could set foot and relive the experience of walking exactly where the legions once marched?

Look, I know it’s only practical to hold so much territory as an empire, but conquest in general was a major financial driver for the Romans, and from what I’ve read on Roman history so far, it seems to me that Hadrian’s strict consolidation of Roman borders laid the groundwork for the empire’s eventual stagnation and decline. So can someone who knows more about the topic please explain to me why they stopped going on major campaigns or conquests?

A Roman portrait from Carrara marble of Emperor Lucius Verus (who co-reigned from 161-169 AD) “probably made by a local workshop following the prototype defined by an official sculptor in Rome. Found during the excavations of the so-called ‘Cartanyà well’ in the area of influence of the Tarraco Colonial Forum.” This work with an intact nose was on display in the archaeological museum in Tarragona, Spain when I photographed it in a special exhibition in the city while that museum is undergoing renovations.

A portion of a Roman mosaic depicting Odysseus/Ulysses, who is tied to his ship while the rest of the crew members have beeswax in their ears in order to sail past Sirens unscathed. This masterpiece - from a scene in Homer's epic poem The Odyssey - dates to the 2nd or 3rd century AD, was found in Dougga and is on display in the Bardo Museum in Tunis, Tunisia.

The Cantabrian Wars were a series of conflicts that took place from 29 BC to 19 BC between Ancient Rome and the various Cantabrian and Asturian peoples, who inhabited territories already known to the ancient Romans as Cantabria and Asturias in the northwest of the Iberian Peninsula, in regions that largely coincide with the current autonomous communities of Cantabria and Asturias and parts of the current provinces of León, Palencia and Burgos.

Cantabrian and Asturian chieftains:

*-Corocotta*
*-Gauson*
__________
Roman leaders:

*Augustus (emperor/Leader)*

*M. Vipsanius Agrippa (General)*

*G. Antistius Vetus (senator/commander)*