Historical figures from the late Roman Republic...

[Conradus]

Caesar, a great general and politician and a briliant orator.

Though honestly I think it's the mix of all those great figures that makes the last century of the Republic so interesting.

[The Wizard]

Lucius Licinius Lucullus. Screw Sulla and screw Pompey.

[seireikhaan]

I AM SPARTACUS!

[Somebody Else]

Most interesting - Octavian, though he should burn in hell for all eternity for destroying the Republic, as should J.C. and the rest for bringing it about.

Favourite - I'm going to join Baba Ga'on with Lucullus; great general, instrumental in defeating Mithradates (though Pompey stole all the glory) who was betrayed by his men and his peers. Possibly also Cassius and/or Brutus - for trying to restore the Republic (though, IMHO, Brutus was an idiot).

[TinCow]

Easily Octavian. I view him as the ultimate (in more ways than one) Republican politician. He played the system better than any of them. Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Crassus, Caeser, Brutus, Lepidus, Marc Antony, etc. all tried to do the same thing he did in their own particular ways, but they all failed. Octavian succeeded, which is all the more remarkable considering his young age, his relative inexperience, and his start as a major underdog. Top it off with the fact that he became (arguably) the best Emperor that Rome ever had, and you have a supremely impressive figure. During his life he was a living God for a very good reason: he dominated the political scene of Rome more completely than any other man in history. Many other men embodied the Republic better than Octavian (I tilt my hat towards Cicero in particular), but in Imperial Rome he has no equal.

[Spino]

Most interesting - Octavian, though he should burn in hell for all eternity for destroying the Republic, as should J.C. and the rest for bringing it about.

Favourite - I'm going to join Baba Ga'on with Lucullus; great general, instrumental in defeating Mithradates (though Pompey stole all the glory) who was betrayed by his men and his peers. Possibly also Cassius and/or Brutus - for trying to restore the Republic (though, IMHO, Brutus was an idiot).

The rise of the Roman Empire was inevitable. Julius Caesar and Octavian aside the Republic was destined to be dissolved or rendered irrelevant one way or another. The fact that one bold, audacious man could send the Republic tumbling down like a house of cards speaks volumes as to the validity and stability of the Roman government at that time.

One could also argue that the excellent Marian Reforms helped hasten the end of the Republic. Marius may have created one of the most effective military machines in history but he also created an entity whose loyalties to the state became questionable. In the post-Marian era expediency and the needs of Rome's ever expanding borders often demanded that these armies be funded in part or entirely by the generals who led them. In most cases these generals were actual statesmen who, by nature of their personal ambitions, created reasons for Rome to go to war so that they could raise a personal army and conquer with the intent of accumulating more power and glory. The fact that the average Legionary became highly dependent on his general and benefactor for pay, incentives and his very survival meant that it was simply a matter of time before the man who controlled the largest and most effective Roman army ultimately became the man who ruled Rome.

[Hound of Ulster]

Octavian. Boy he was a character, and the 'clan' he founded was something else too.

[Furious Mental]

Where is Cato on that list? He was such a clown.

[Furious Mental]

Where is Cato on that list? He was such a clown. Also, where is Agrippa? He pretty much won all Octavian's battles for him.

[Sarmatian]

Most interesting - Octavian, though he should burn in hell for all eternity for destroying the Republic, as should J.C. and the rest for bringing it about.

I'm curious, why do you think that? Is it because you think republic is inherently better than empire (monarchy), or do you think that Rome in particular would be better off as a Republic?

[CountArach]

Sertorius is the most interesting in my opinion. Beign able to run a successful rebellion with a political system based on that of the people you are rebelling against is not something that can be done often.

[Vorenus]

I'm curious, why do you think that? Is it because you think republic is inherently better than empire (monarchy), or do you think that Rome in particular would be better off as a Republic?

Well, I think it would have been better off as a republic. Having a republic ensures that you don't get people such as Caligula and Nero having absolute control.

All the republic needed was better control over the military and maybe better voting methods.

[CountArach]

Well, I think it would have been better off as a republic. Having a republic ensures that you don't get people such as Caligula and Nero having absolute control.

All the republic needed was better control over the military and maybe better voting methods.

Yeah, instead you get Marius and Sulla having absolute control.

[King Kurt]

I AM SPARTACUS!

NO I AM SPARTACUS - I EVEN HAVE THE DIMPLE IN MY CHIN - KAMIKHAAN LOOKS MORE LIKE TONY CURTIS