Talk Elections

General Politics => Individual Politics => Topic started by: Chunk Yogurt for President! on September 12, 2017, 06:12:36 PM



Title: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Chunk Yogurt for President! on September 12, 2017, 06:12:36 PM
This is the first in a series of polls where I ask Atlas which side they would support in history's various civil wars.

*Only vote abstain if you think both sides were truly the scum of the earth.

Optimates (prefers a Republic over an Empire)


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Kingpoleon on September 12, 2017, 06:53:02 PM
Populares, but only because I prefer Antonius and Brutus live.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: GoTfan on September 12, 2017, 07:08:29 PM
Populares, but only because I prefer Antonius and Brutus live.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: The Govanah Jake on September 12, 2017, 09:10:55 PM


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Lumine on September 12, 2017, 09:15:27 PM
Optimates. Yes, hindsight would have told me of Caesar's clemency and brilliance in government, but if at the time I had to choose between the legal government of Rome (backed by Pompeius Magnus, no less) and an overambitious general invading his own homeland to avoid being charged with treason, it would have been an easy choice.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Lechasseur on September 12, 2017, 09:48:51 PM
Probably Populares


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Unconditional Surrender Truman on September 12, 2017, 10:01:38 PM
Of course the Populares, though as Lumine says, hindsight makes the choice much easier.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Unconditional Surrender Truman on September 12, 2017, 11:47:21 PM
Generally, I'd be very skeptical of the claim that Rome was not already an empire by 49 BC, or that the Optimates were not equally culpable in the fall of the republic. Let's not forget that the first general to march on Rome was not Caesar, but Sulla.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Lechasseur on September 12, 2017, 11:57:35 PM
Generally, I'd be very skeptical of the claim that Rome was not already an empire by 49 BC, or that the Optimates were not equally culpable in the fall of the republic. Let's not forget that the first general to march on Rome was not Caesar, but Sulla.

This. The Republic was on its' last legs anyway.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Lumine on September 13, 2017, 12:02:22 AM
Still, it ought to be remembered only a particular set of circumstances gave us the Empire as we knew it (due to just how unique Augustus was as a historical character), and even then it took decades to turn it into full-scale autocracy.

Even if the old system of the Republic had become corrupt and flawed in many ways, it was by no means dead or doomed, and I would assert it was perfectly possible for a "republican" system to last. An Optimate win doesn't produce an individual strong and popular enough to duplicate Caesar's example within that generation (Pompey was old and had proved he didn't quite had what it took to seize full control, and his sons never appeared to enjoy much popularity outside of Sextus Pompey).

As for Sulla, I've always felt Marius has to take the ultimate blame for pushing Sulla too far.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Kingpoleon on September 13, 2017, 08:08:37 AM
I'd argue that Rome's best bet was in the next civil war - Marcus Antonius and Cleopatra.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Chunk Yogurt for President! on September 13, 2017, 08:23:16 AM
Generally, I'd be very skeptical of the claim that Rome was not already an empire by 49 BC, or that the Optimates were not equally culpable in the fall of the republic. Let's not forget that the first general to march on Rome was not Caesar, but Sulla.

This certainly isn't a Civil War with clear good guys and bad guys, and there are reasons to support either side.  But IMO the Republic at least has a better chance with the Optimates.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Wakie77 on September 13, 2017, 09:00:11 AM
Doesn't this thread belong in History?


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: The Mikado on September 13, 2017, 09:56:35 AM
You mean 52-49, right? Pompey dies in early 48 and the rest of the war is a mop-up operation against Cato and Scipio in Africa that was never seriously in doubt.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Lumine on September 13, 2017, 11:56:08 AM
You mean 52-49, right? Pompey dies in early 48 and the rest of the war is a mop-up operation against Cato and Scipio in Africa that was never seriously in doubt.

Aye, the whole Africa campaign was sort of a done deal. But what about Spain? Caesar was ridiculously close to being defeated and killed at Munda by the Pompey brothers, and had he died there he would have gone down with most of his senior staff + Octavian. You then have Antonius and Lepidus in Rome against a victorious Pompeian army in Spain, which is by no means a one-sided affair.


Title: Re: Civil War Series I, Roman Civil War (49-45 BC)
Post by: Chunk Yogurt for President! on September 13, 2017, 02:02:41 PM
You mean 52-49, right? Pompey dies in early 48 and the rest of the war is a mop-up operation against Cato and Scipio in Africa that was never seriously in doubt.

This is the war I'm referring to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar%27s_Civil_War