[Multi-AAR] - History of men - EB part

**Fixiwee** · 03-14-2010, 14:36

Before beginning, plan carefully.
-Marcus Tullius Cicero

The first triumvirate

A history of Rome, by Prof Alfred Kennard, 2002 New York

In 61 BC Nero presented his law regarding his veterans before the Senate. He didn’t expect any troubles considering the rather modest version of the law. But Nero was looked with scepticism from his own people – the Optimates. And now the disintegration process of the Roman Republic started in full effect. The most prominent members of the Senate, Iunius Brutus and Sergius Orata, blocked the law. Ancient historians already wondered why the elder Iunius Brutus acted totally irreproducible in handling Nero. The successful general then tried to push his law through the people’s assembly but fights on the Forum prevented the any further actions. Nero realised that he was rejected by his own people. Frustrated he had to look for new allies. In that sense the Optimates played Nero right into the hands of Marcus Julius Caesar.

The elderly Brutus. His irresponsible actions played Nero into the arms of Caesar.

Caesar had served as Propraetor in Illyria from 65 to 63 BC. In those years he campaigned against Illyrians and Pannonians in modern-day Slovenia. According to Helenos biography of Caesar he defeated armies over 15.000 men in both battles.

When he returned to Rome in 62 BC the Senate refused to award the leader of the Populares a Triumph. Angered by the Senates decision he set for a more aggressive rhetoric against the Optimates. In 61 BC he staged a spectacle to the surprise of both the Roman people and the senate. Caesar brought the exiled son of Aulus Atilius Calatinus – Servius Atilius Calatinus (or Calatinus the younger) to Rome. While Servius Calatinus did not have any political significance at the time being, this action was seen as a provocation against the Senate.

Calatinus the younger.

While Nero had been a supporter of Silanus back in the day he recognised Caesars daring move against the Senate and that was exactly what he was looking for. The following details and the exact timeline are unclear but eventually (probably in the winter of 61 BC) Caesar and Nero started a political alliance to support each other in the Senate. A third man soon joined the Alliance: the wealthy Lucius Papirius Crassus, a ruthless politician who failed becoming Consul over the past years. It was already rumoured back then that Crassus had connections with criminal groups in Rome (which will turn out to be significant later). Finally the triumvirate was born, not more then a private agreement, though it was kept secret from the Senate for the time being.

A young Nero. At the time of the triumvirate he was already 41.

A young Caesar. He was 39 at the beginning of the triumvirate.

In 60 BC it was agreed that Nero and Crassus would run for the consulship in 59 BC so that Nero could finally pass his veteran law. Caesar would run for consul the following year to protect Neros the laws. In return Nero would support Caesar to become Proconsul in one of the rich eastern provinces.
The Roman elections in spring 60 BC were accompanied with new turmoil and violence in the Senate and on the Forum but at last the motives became of the triumvirate became clear. Inius Brutus and Sergius Orata faced a new danger, yet they were ultimately helpless and could do nothing but watch Nero and Crassus become elected for consul.

**Hannibal Khan the Great** · 03-15-2010, 06:47

You should change Clavdivs's name to Pompeivs....

**Fixiwee** · 03-15-2010, 16:08

Originally Posted by Hannibal Khan the Great

You should change Clavdivs's name to Pompeivs....

Thank you for your comment.
If you mean that you Nero is heavily inspired by Pomeius you are right.
But the fact that I am playing a alternative history means that Nero is Nero in this story. He comes from one of the most presitgious and ancient families from Rome and early fame hindered his career more then helping him. I really want to stress out that there are some huge differences between my fictious Nero and the historic Pompeius. Maybe it will become more apperent when the Republic will come down. In the TWC forum someone sumed up really good what this AAR (especially the Roman civil war) is about:

Originally Posted by Redolegna

Then it would be Marius instead of Calatinus, Sulla instead of Silanus, Cato instead of Metellus and so on and so forth. It's a partial reenactment of history with slight differences. I tend to see it as what would happen if a butterfly flew a bit differently... it would probably alter the actors of the great drama that is history but maybe not the events or at least the pattern of events that much.