The Roman Empire: The History and Legacy of the Ancient World’s Most Famous Empire from Julius Caesar to Its Collapse

The Roman Empire: The History and Legacy of the Ancient World’s Most Famous Empire from Julius Caesar to Its Collapse

By Charles River Editors

Marie-Lan Nguyen’s picture of a bust of Claudius

About Charles River Editors

Charles River Editors is a boutique digital publishing company, specializing in bringing history back to life with educational and engaging books on a wide range of topics. We make these books for you and always want to know our readers’ opinions, so we encourage you to leave reviews and look forward to publishing new and exciting titles each week.

Introduction

The statue of Augustus on Via dei Fori Imperiali in Rome

The Roman Empire

The importance of Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus (or as he was known from birth, Gaius Octavius Octavian Thurinus) to the course of Western history is hard to overstate. His life, his rise to power, his political, and his social and military achievements all laid the foundations for the creation of an empire which would endure for almost five centuries, and whose traditions, laws, architecture and art continue to influence much of Europe and the world today. Octavian was the first true Roman Emperor, and the first man since the Etruscan Tarquins five centuries earlier to establish a successful hereditary ruling dynasty in what had been a proud Republic for over half a millennium. He was a canny strategist, an excellent orator, a fine writer, a generous patron of the arts and enthusiastic promoter of public works, but above all he was a master politician. Octavian’s great-uncle (and adoptive father) Julius Caesar was a great general, and his rival Mark Antony was a great soldier, but as a politician Octavian outmatched them all.

Certainly, like all men, Octavian had his defects. Like many of the most successful politicians, he could connive, plot and prevaricate with the best of them, and he made full use of the emotional pull that his late beloved great-uncle had over the legions during the course of his rise to power. His justice was also famously heavy-handed, and he was not known for his mercy towards those he defeated in battle or marginalized political opponents. Yet despite all this, he still stands in bronze on Rome’s Via dei Fori Imperiali to this day, along with the likes of Caesar, Hadrian, Trajan and Marcus Aurelius, and he is forever immortalized in all Western calendars as the patron of the month of August, which was dedicated to him when he was deified, following his death, as Divus Augustus.

Like his adoptive father before him, Octavian is one of those figures whom it is difficult to know exactly what to make of, because he appears, even at a distance, to be larger than life. Yet the amount of personal correspondence and contemporary writings penned by Octavian himself, as well as his friends, associates, and rivals, helps form a clear picture of the man behind the bronze statue. Indeed, he was the ruler who found Rome a city of bricks and left it a city of marble.

One of the most overlooked emperors was also one of the first, and he lived in chaotic times. Tiberius was born in 42 BCE, just as the Roman Republic was dissolving and a new Roman imperial power structure emerged under Octavian, who became Rome’s first emperor as Caesar Augustus. Tiberius’s life soon became caught up with Augustus’s as the emperor worked to found and establish a dynasty, but it is unclear if Tiberius ever really wanted to be part of Augustus’s plans or inherit imperial power - Tiberius was known as a man who schemed and planned, but he was also a scholar and showed a marked desire throughout his life to retreat and escape the demands of power. Partially due to this continual tension, Tiberius’s life is enigmatic in many ways.

Tiberius championed the Republic and seemed to desire its return, yet his acceptance of imperial power and his reign solidified Rome’s transition to an empire. He was a skilled general who showed concern for the well-being of his troops, and he displayed a remarkable patience as a military tactician. After he rose to become emperor in 14 CE, he ruled for over 22 years, which would be the longest reign of a Roman emperor over the next 100 years, but he remained suspicious of everyone and eventually chose the wrong person to trust, being eventually misled and betrayed by a man whom he thought was his closest friend. When he finally died, aged and lonely, he had become so hated that crowds celebrated his death.

Not surprisingly, given Tiberius’s lack of popularity, especially at the end of his life, many of the primary sources present a view of Tiberius that is skewed in one direction or other, usually negatively. For example, Tacitus explicitly aimed to display examples of morally good and evil characters for his audience, and described Tiberius as a man who undergoes moral decline to become a hypocritical leader and a cruel tyrant, an enemy of freedom and justice. Suetonius, likewise, is concerned with tying the story together under a moral theme, and he depicts Tiberius as a man with problems such as cruelty and hatred toward his family. Cassius Dio wrote later than the other authors, and his account has many similarities with Suetonius’s and Tacitus’s. On the other hand, the account of Velleius Paterculus, a contemporary of Tiberius’s, gives a more positive viewpoint; Velleius celebrated the peace that was achieved under Augustus and the continuation of the benefits of Augustus’s reign under Tiberius, as well as lauding Tiberius as a careful, brilliant, and courageous leader.

All of Rome’s poor rulers pale in comparison to Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, a young man remembered by posterity as Caligula. Given how bad some of Rome’s emperors were, it’s a testament to just how insane and reviled Caligula was that he is still remembered nearly 2,000 years later as the epitome of everything that could be wrong with a tyrant. The Romans had high hopes for him after he succeeded Tiberius in 37 CE, and by all accounts he was a noble and just ruler during his first few months in power. But after that, he suffered some sort of mysterious illness that apparently rendered him insane, and the list of Caligula’s strange actions became quite lengthy in almost no time at all. Among other things, Caligula began appearing in public dressed as gods and goddesses, and his incest, sexual perversion, and thirst for blood were legendary at the time, difficult accomplishments considering Roman society was fairly accustomed to and tolerant of such things.

Caligula has always fascinated people, and people have speculated for centuries whether the stories about his misdeeds are true, but what is clear is that the Romans had more than enough by 41 CE, when the Praetorian Guard turned on the young emperor and assassinated him. Caligula’s reign was so traumatic to the Romans that they even considered restoring the Republic, but military officials ultimately installed Claudius, the only male left in the Julian family line, as emperor.

Today, Claudius is particularly remembered for the conquest of Britain, as Roman power there had weakened since Julius Caesar had invaded nearly a century before. Beyond this, he established Roman colonies on the frontiers of the empire, annexed several territories in North Africa (including Thrace and Mauritania), and made Judea a province. Claudius’s rule stands out in other aspects as well. He paid great attention to Rome’s judicial system and religious policy, and the Empire’s infrastructure was improved during his reign, with the construction of new roads and aqueducts, as well as a new harbor at Ostia. Efforts were also made to import grain as a reliable food source for Italy. Claudius also made significant changes to the government's administrative system, increasing the emperor's control and using freedmen as the heads of several divisions of administration, such as the treasury. Additionally, he realized the importance of the provinces and worked to incorporate them into the empire fully.

What makes Claudius such a surprisingly effective emperor, aside from his strange route to power, was that he was considered physically and mentally incompetent for political life. At the same time, Claudius managed to take the throne against the will of the Senate thanks to the support of the Praetorian Guard, and despite his efforts to work with the Senate, the relationship would always be troublesome. Under Claudius, the Senate lost power, which is partially why some of the most important sources on Claudius’s life and reign are openly hostile toward him. The Apocolocyntosis divi Claudii, written by Seneca (who had been exiled at the beginning of Claudius’s reign), ridicules the emperor’s physical difficulties and judicial decisions. Later writers, such as Tacitus, Cassius Dio, and Suetonius, echo what Seneca wrote, claiming that Claudius was controlled by his wives and the freedmen he'd made a part of his government. The facts of Claudius’s reign paint a different picture, however, leaving a complex legacy and far more nuance than contemporaries were willing to give him.

Claudius’s successor, Nero, ranks among the very worst of the Caesars, alongside the likes of mad Caligula, slothful Commodus, and paranoid Domitian, a figure so hated that, in many ancient Christian traditions, he is literally, without hyperbole, considered the Antichrist; according to a notable Biblical scholar, the coming of the Beast and the number 666 in the Book of Revelation are references to Nero. He was the man who, famously, fiddled while Rome burned, an inveterate lecher, a murderous tyrant who showed little compunction in murdering his mother and who liked to use Christian martyrs as a source of illumination at night – by burning them alive. His economic policies, according to many historians, virtually bankrupted Rome.

The best known accounts of Nero come from biographers like Tacitus, Cassius Dio, Suetionius and Josephus, but there are also indications that, to some extent, reports of Nero’s cruelty were exaggerated. Nero was popular with the common people and much of the army, and during his reign the Empire enjoyed a period of remarkable peace and stability. Many historians, including some of his ancient biographers – such as Josephus – suggest that there existed a strong bias against Nero. Part of this is because his successors wished to discredit him, and justify the insurrections which eventually drove him, hounded from the throne, to a lonely suicide. Much of the bias against Nero can also be attributed to the fact that he was a renowned persecutor of Christians, and since many of the historians who wrote about Nero in the years after his death were Christians themselves, it made sense for them to have a jaundiced view of their erstwhile nemesis. Because of this, some historians have suggested that Nero’s demeanor and reputation might not be as black as the original sources might be inclined to suggest.

The Five Good Emperors, a reference to the five emperors who ruled the Roman Empire between 96 and 180 CE (Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius), was a term first coined by Machiavelli and later adopted and popularized by historian Edward Gibbon, who said that under these men, the Roman Empire was governed by absolute power under the guidance of wisdom and virtue.

This period of 84 years is generally regarded as the high point of the Roman Empire, at least after Augustus, but what is uncertain and a matter of ongoing debate is whether the five emperors were personally responsible for the situation and the accompanying prosperity enjoyed throughout the empire at the time or if they were simply the beneficiaries of the Pax Romana, inaugurated by Augustus in the early part of the 1st century CE. In other words, historians have wondered whether anyone in power during those years would have enjoyed the same rewards.

The description of these rulers as good is also a matter of interpretation, with some scholars suggesting they were only good in comparison to the preceding emperor (Domitian) and the emperor who followed Marcus Aurelius (Commodus). Both of them were horrible rulers in every aspect, making their near contemporaries look all the better.

Regardless, it is clear that the era of the Five Good Emperors was one of unparalleled success and wealth, and the reasons Rome reached its zenith at this time are worthy of scrutiny. Perhaps most noteworthy is that none of these five emperors were blood relatives - while the final two are often referred to as the Antonines, they were not, in fact, related except by adoption, a practice that may in itself provide at least part of the answer to the question as to why this particular period was so magnificent.

These 84 years also witnessed an impressive growth in the size of the Roman Empire. New acquisitions ranged from northern Britain to Arabia, Mesopotamia, and Dacia. Furthermore, existing possessions were consolidated, and the empire’s defenses improved when compared to what had come before. A range of countries that had been client states became fully integrated provinces, and even Italy saw administrative reforms which created further wealth. Throughout the empire, the policy of Romanization proved successful, at least in terms of introducing a common language, enabling standards of living to rise, and creating a political system minimizing internal strife.

With all of that said, according to some academics, the success these rulers had in centralizing the empire's administration, while undoubtedly bringing huge benefits, also sowed the seeds for later problems. After all, as so many Roman emperors proved, from Caligula and Nero to Commodus, the empire’s approach to governance was predicated on the ruler's ability. When incompetent or insane emperors came to power, the whole edifice came tumbling down.

The Severan dynasty came shortly after the Five Good Emperors, and it also consisted of five emperors who ruled the empire from 193-235, except for a brief interlude between 217 and 218 when Macrinus held the imperial throne. In chronological order, the five were Septimius Severus the Founder (193-211), Caracalla (198-217), Geta (209-211), Elagabalus (218-221), and Alexander Severus (222-235). Their reigns coincided with the period in Roman history characterized by academics as the High Point of the empire, but this specific dynastic period, following the troubled years after the rule of Marcus Aurelius’ son Commodus, did not see the empire return to the heights reached under the Five Good Emperors. It was a period in which the inherent weaknesses of the imperial system were exacerbated, and the policies of successive emperors paved the way for the era generally known as Rome’s Imperial Crisis or The Time of Chaos (235-284).

Septimus would go on to restore order following the brief civil war of the 190s, though the success of the other Severans' ability to hold the empire together should not be underestimated. By the time of Elagabalus and Alexander Severus, imperial authority was in decline, and Rome faced formidable external challenges to its very existence. The Severans, also known as the Septimii, were of Punic African and Italian origin. The family hailed from the equestrian order and had risen steadily so that by the time of the dynasty's birth, the first two members had already become senators and consuls. Septimius was to become the first emperor of North African origin, and he established the dynasty at the helm of the empire in one of its most difficult periods.

The Severans' story encapsulates many highs and lows, including able and venal emperors, expansion and loss of territory, great artistic achievements, and intellectual advancements, coupled with some of the worst cruelty ever perpetrated by Romans. The Severans have also fared well historically thanks to their successors, because the 50 years following the assassination of Severus Alexander on March 19, 235 has been generally regarded by academics as one of the lowest points in the history of the Roman Empire. Severus Alexander was the last of the Severan emperors, and the subsequent years of crisis (235-285) were characterized by a series of short reigns, usually ending in the violent death of the reigning emperor. At the same time, this period of time also saw the empire beset by threatening forces on all sides. The Romans faced a newly resurgent Persia in the east, as well as significant forces from German tribes on the Rhine and Goths along the Danube. The various conflicts would result in the unprecedented death of a sitting emperor in battle, which took place in 251 with Emperor Decius, and Emperor Valerian was also captured in 260.

The 50 years following the assassination of Severus Alexander on March 19, 235 CE has been generally regarded by academics as one of the lowest points in the history of the Roman Empire. This stands in stark contrast to the previous 150 years, which included the reigns of the Five Good Emperors and has been universally praised as one of the high points of the empire. Severus Alexander was the last of the Severan emperors, and the subsequent years of crisis (235-285 CE) were characterized by a series of short reigns, usually ending in the violent death of the reigning emperor.

At the same time, this period of time also saw the empire beset by threatening forces on all sides. The Romans faced a newly resurgent Persia in the east, as well as significant forces from German tribes on the Rhine and Goths along the Danube. The various conflicts would result in the unprecedented death of a sitting emperor in battle, which took place in 251 with Emperor Decius, and Emperor Valerian was captured in 260 CE.

Despite the disasters, there was at least some good news for the Romans. Aurelian and Probus both managed to recover lost territory, and they recovered some of Rome’s prestige in doing so. The final turning point came with the accession of Diocletian in 284 CE. From that point on, the empire embarked upon a period of restoration, but before reaching that stage, the empire had no fewer than 20 emperors in those 50 years, even with the exclusion of an additional five Gallic emperors who set themselves up as independent rulers between 260 and 274 CE.

Diocletian's reign would see reforms put into place to achieve the desired end of the Imperial Crisis, and several of the emperors before him may well have had the ability to manage the reform process, but the army’s power and willingness to use and abuse power ensured that few of them truly had a chance to really make their marks. It was the worst period in the history of the Roman Empire to that point, even as it forced the Romans to deal with belligerent foreign powers and problems created by the emergence of increasingly powerful and populous provinces.

The pressures created by population growth, both within the empire and outside of it, have been thoroughly researched, but more recently, issues created by climate change have also commanded attention. The previously held assumption was that population increases in modern Germany and further east pushed hostile groups into Roman territory, and it is now believed that in the 2nd century CE, climate change led to significant rises in sea levels that caused massive flooding and the destruction of crops in Eastern Europe. This may have given people the impetus to migrate south and west, at the very time Rome was focused on containing the Sassanid Persian Empire. It is often overlooked that the Persian Empire was every bit as large as that of the Romans and equally well developed militarily during this period, which explains the difficulty Rome had in their relations.

As Roman leaders vied with each other for power and constantly fought civil wars, Rome’s famous roads fall into disrepair, the economy was crippled, the continent-wide trade system that had flourished in the previous years was replaced with a basic barter system, and there was a reduction in international trade. People became ever more fearful for their personal safety, and the Imperial Crisis saw an increasing trend toward sacrificing personal liberties and rights in return for guarantees of safety from wealthy landowners. All of this foreshadowed the emergence of the European feudal system and serfdom.

These were obviously turbulent times, and given the volatility, many historians have debated how the Roman Empire managed to survive in any form at all, let alone remain robust enough to allow Diocletian and his successors to restore it. Given the many people involved, and the relatively short era in which everything transpired, Rome’s Imperial Crisis has been difficult for historians to summarize, which is why, despite being one of the most intriguing periods in Roman history, it is often overlooked by people who have chosen to focus on the more cohesive periods before and after it.

It would be hard if not outright impossible to overstate the impact Roman Emperor Constantine I had on the history of Christianity, Ancient Rome, and Europe as a whole. Best known as Constantine the Great, the kind of moniker only earned by rulers who have distinguished themselves in battle and conquest, Constantine remains an influential and controversial figure to this day. He achieved enduring fame by being the first Roman emperor to personally convert to Christianity, and for his notorious Edict of Milan, the imperial decree which legalized the worship of Christ and promoted religious freedom throughout the Empire. More than 1500 years after Constantine’s death, Abdu'l-Bahá, the head of the Bahá'í Faith, wrote, His blessed name shines out across the dawn of history like the morning star, and his rank and fame among the world's noblest and most highly civilized is still on the tongues of Christians of all denominations

Moreover, even though he is best remembered for his religious reforms and what his (mostly Christian) admirers described as his spiritual enlightenment, Constantine was also an able and effective ruler in his own right. Rising to power in a period of decline and confusion for the Roman Empire, he gave it a new and unexpected lease on life by repelling the repeated invasions of the Germanic tribes on the Northern and Eastern borders of the Roman domains, even going so far as to re-expand the frontier into parts of Trajan’s old conquest of Dacia (modern Romania), which had been abandoned as strategically untenable.

However, it can be argued that despite his military successes – the most notable of which occurred fighting for supremacy against other Romans – Constantine may well have set the stage for the ultimate collapse of the Roman Empire as it had existed up until that point. It was Constantine who first decided that Rome, exposed and vulnerable near the gathering masses of barbarians moving into Germania and Gaul, was a strategically unsafe base for the Empire, and thus expanded the city of New Rome on the Dardanelles straits, creating what eventually became Constantinople. By moving the political, administrative and military capital of the Empire from Rome to the East, as well as the Imperial court with all its attendant followers, Constantine laid the groundwork for the eventual schism which saw the two parts of the Roman Empire become two entirely separate entities, go their own way, and eventually collapse piecemeal under repeated waves of invasion.

The Roman Empire: The History and Legacy of the Ancient World’s Most Famous Empire from Julius Caesar to Its Collapse examines the history of Rome after the fall of the Republic. Along with pictures depicting important people, places, and events, you will learn about the empire like never before.

The Roman Empire: The History and Legacy of the Ancient World’s Most Famous Empire from Julius Caesar to Its Collapse

About Charles River Editors

Introduction

Octavian’s Early Years

The Great Civil War

Caesar’s Assassination

Becoming the Ruler of Rome

Augustus

Tiberius’s Early Years

Succession Issues

Sudden Retirement in Rhodes

Return to Power

A Rough Start to Tiberius’s Reign

The Good Years

Later Years

Caligula’s Early Years

Descent into Madness

More Troubles

A Fitting End

Claudius’s Background

The Rise of an Unlikely Emperor

War and Consolidation

Claudius as Ruler of Rome

Claudius’s Final Years

Nero’s Early Life

Nero Consolidates Power

A World on Fire

Nero’s Final Years

The End of a Dynasty

Nerva

Trajan

Hadrian

Antoninus Pius

Marcus Aurelius

Septimius Severus and the Start of the Severan Dynasty

Caracalla and Geta

Macrinus and Diadumenianus

Elagabalus

Alexander Severus

The Severan Princesses

The Beginning of the Chaos

The Lost Years

Restoration

The End of the Imperial Crisis

A Power Shift

The Germanic Invasions of Europe

Early Germanic Concepts of Government and Kingship

The Battle of Adrianople

The Vandals Become a People

Alaric and the Sack of Rome

Theodoric the Great and the Rise and Fall of the Ostrogoth Kingdom of Italy

Emperor Justinian I and Reunification

Online Resources

Further Reading

Octavian’s Early Years

Gaius Octavius Thurinus, commonly known as Octavian, was born in Rome on September 23, 63 BCE. He was a scion of the Octavii, minor local aristocracy from Velletri (a town not far from Rome) who had enriched themselves through the family banking business to the point where Gaius Octavius, Octavian’s father, had been able to climb the social ladder by marrying Atia Caesonia, a member of the venerable Gens Iulia and Julius Caesar’s niece. Although the Octavii were by no means what could be termed as patricians, they had recently made it big, so to speak, when in 70 BCE Gaius Octavius had been elevated to the rank of quaestor and granted a seat in the Senate.

Octavian was never close to his father, who was elected praetor, an office which often required him to be away from home, in 61 BCE, two years after Octavian’s birth. The following year he was dispatched to Macedonia, where he served for two years while Atia, Octavian and his two older sisters (Octavia Major and Minor, respectively) remained in Rome. On his return to the city, he died under mysterious circumstances in Nola, southern Italy, without even seeing his family again. Thus, at the age of four, Octavian was an orphan, and it fell to his mother, as well as an elderly household slave named Sphaerus, to fill the void that Gaius Octavius had left.

For the next two years they both tutored Octavian, who excelled at both Latin and Greek, as well as the rudiments of oratory that upper-class young boys were expected to learn at his age. The bond that formed between Sphaerus and Octavian during this time was so strong that he became a constant companion throughout the young boy’s childhood, and later in life he would be granted both his freedom and a generous pension. After two years of respectable widowhood, Atia re-married, this time to Lucius Philippus, an up-and-coming patrician who, the following year, confirmed Atia’s high hopes by securing his election as consul, and who by all accounts seems to have loved his step-children as though they were his own.

Philippus was a strong member of Julius Caesar’s faction, the populares, who at the time were vying for political control with the oligarchic, aristocratic optimates. To lead the populares to victory, Caesar, who had already established himself as a highly successful general, had formed an alliance in 59 BCE with the wealthy Crassus and the doughty old soldier Pompey Magnus, creating a Triumvirate of three among the most powerful men in Rome. However, in the following years, as Octavian grew into an ever more promising child, the alliance began to break apart and suffered two fatal blows when, in 53 BCE, Crassus was killed fighting the Parthians and Caesar’s daughter Julia, who was married to Pompey, died in childbirth.

Caesar

Pompey, who resented Caesar’s ascendancy and the vastly successful campaign the younger man was waging in Gaul, began to conspire to bring about his downfall. Octavian was largely oblivious to this, however, and the following year he made his first foray into public affairs at the age of 11, when he was called upon to give the funeral oration for his grandmother Julia, Caesar’s sister. His oratory was so fine, despite his young age, that report of it reached Caesar in Gaul, and he began to take a keen interest in the young boy.

Pompey

The Great Civil War

In 50 BCE, when Octavian was just 13, matters came to a head between Caesar and Pompey. By the end of the Gallic wars, the alliance between Caesar and Pompey had devolved from alliance to rivalry, and when his governorship ended in 50 BCE, Pompey was ready to gain an upper hand in Rome. In 50 BCE, with his term as governor having ended, Caesar received a formal order by the Senate, largely the product of Pompey’s machinations, to disband his army and return to Rome, but Caesar was certain that he was going to be held to account for his debts and other irregularities. Assuming that any trial he participated would likely be a witch-hunt specifically designed to permanently tarnish him, he would have none of it.

Refusing to obey the Senate, Pompey worked to have Caesar accused of treason. Instead, in 49 BCE, Caesar headed south for Italy that January at the head of the 13th Legion, despite repeated remonstrations by the Senate and threats by Pompey. That month, Caesar and his men crossed the Rubicon River into Italy, thus entering Italy as invaders, and it’s likely that similar exploits by his uncle Marius and Sulla were playing in his mind. According to Suetonius and Plutarch, as his troops filed by, he famously quoted the Greek playwright Menander, remarking: The die is cast.

With Rome’s most famous civil war now having started, Pompey was assigned by the Senate to defend Rome, but he apparently felt he did not have enough forces to confront Caesar. Pompey chose to abandon the city without giving battle, citing the inexperience of his troops when compared to Caesar’s veterans as his reason for retreating, despite having vastly superior numbers. Caesar formally entered Rome shortly thereafter, taking control of the city and being recognised as Dictator by the senators who still remained.

Caesar entered Rome in triumph, with his loyal friend Mark Antony, who had been campaigning on his behalf in the Senate until a few weeks previously, by his side. He was greeted with joy by the people and his fellow populares, but did not remain long in the city, for he was conscious of the threat posed by Pompey and his supporters, who were marching to Brundisium in order to flee Italy altogether. It is not recorded whether Caesar met Octavian during this period, but it seems reasonable to assume he must have done so. Indeed, there is every likelihood that Octavian talked to Caesar and left a good impression with his great-uncle, for he was not forgotten.

Of course, with Pompey and his men still a threat, Caesar hadn’t won yet. Leaving his principle subordinate Mark Antony to govern Rome for him, Caesar marched north and quickly defeated forces loyal to Pompey in Spain. He then turned south to pursue Pompey and several senators (mostly optimates) who were loyal to him, all of whom were still on the run. Pompey managed to slip away from Caesar’s clutches and headed for nearby Greece, leading Caesar to cross the Mediterranean and disembark his men in Greece.

Pompey finally gave battle at Greece, quickly demonstrating why he had earned the title Magnus. The older general displayed a flash of his former self when he savaged Caesar’s vastly outnumbered army at the Battle of Dyrrachium in July of 48 BCE, but one of the few who realized the extent of the victory was Pompey himself. Believing that he had not scored a major victory, Pompey refused to follow it up as Caesar retreated. Caesar himself realized it, noting, Victory today would have been the enemy’s, if only anyone among them had possessed the good sense to grasp it.

Pompey’s chances of winning the civil war had been lost. Having joined up with seaborne reinforcements led by Mark Antony, Caesar brought Pompey to battle at Pharsalus and, despite being heavily outnumbered, succeeded in badly defeating Pompey’s men. Pompey managed to flee in the ensuing rout, possibly by disguising himself as a common merchant. Caesar, satisfied with his victory, returned to Rome where he was hailed as a liberator and proclaimed Dictator once again, naming Mark Antony Master of the Horse, a position which effectively made the young general his second-in-command. In a token gesture, Caesar ran for Consul in what was a guaranteed victory and then resigned his dictatorship once he had secured his position – all this with his legions encamped outside the city serving a silent but persuasive threat.

Having heard a rumor that Pompey was attempting to raise men against him in Egypt, Caesar took ship for Alexandria, only to find upon his arrival that Pompey had been murdered on the orders of Egypt’s young pharaoh, the boy-king Ptolemy XIII. According to legend, the pharaoh’s treatment of Pompey enraged Caesar, as Pompey’s callous demise was not befitting one of the greatest Romans of the age. Caesar’s relationship with his rival had always been a complex one, and he is said to have wept when Ptolemy presented him with Pompey’s head. Although Caesar was there chasing Pompey’s men, he quickly became involved in Egypt’s own civil war. As a consequence of Ptolemy’s barbarity, Caesar impulsively decided to side with his sister Cleopatra in her bid for the throne of Egypt, escalating what was rapidly becoming an all-out civil war. Egypt at the time was a client state of Rome, though not a full-fledged province, and the main provider of grain for the ever-hungry city’s depots. Again according to legend, Cleopatra famously seduced Caesar, who at 52 was over 30 years her senior, by being brought to him in a rolled-up carpet, and the ever ambitious Roman was also impressed by the lavish and exotic lifestyles Egypt’s royalty enjoyed.

While his romantic relationship with Cleopatra developed, Caesar resisted a siege by Ptolemy’s forces in Alexandria throughout 48 BCE, then led his troops out of the city and defeated Ptolemy’s army at the Battle of the Nile in January of 47 BC. Ptolemy’s army was equipped as hoplites. The Ptolemy line was directly descended from one of Alexander the Great’s Greek generals, had always considered themselves Greek and introduced military reforms to make their armies more similar to those of Macedonia and the Ancient Greeks. The hoplites fought with exceedingly long sarissas (pikes), but the cumbersome weapons made it impossible to defend themselves from the showers of javelins the Romans hurled before closing in. Making matters worse, the weapons were virtually useless once the Roman soldiers had gotten inside their reach, a fact that Macedonian and Greek hoplites had already painfully learned during Rome’s conquest of Greece. Ptolemy’s army was routed and he was killed in battle, officially ending Egypt’s civil war.

A bust of Cleopatra

While Caesar embroiled himself in the civil war between Ptolemy and Cleopatra, he nonetheless sent a list of people he wished to put forward for public office to Rome. Among the names was that of Octavian. At the time, Octavian was 15 and, as tradition dictated, he had been formally invested with manhood, meaning he could stand for office. Nevertheless, he was still very young for the exalted position that Caesar had nominated him for, which was that of pontifex (pontiff), a priest of the most important religious order in Rome. With Caesar’s patronage, Octavian’s election was assured, and shortly thereafter Caesar lavished another gift upon Octavian by appointing him Praefectus Urbi (Prefect of the City), a position which, though ceremonial, gave him a chance to mix with the political elite, to watch, learn and become known to them.

While he was in the Pontus, Caesar received intelligence that Cato the Younger had raised an army in Northern Africa and intended to march on Rome. Cato the Younger had a strong reputation among his contemporaries as a philosophical, moral and steadfast statesman who had long opposed Caesar and others’ corruption. Having been part of the Senate group loyal to Pompey, Cato had been on the run since the civil war broke out.

Caesar quickly marshaled his forces and took ship for Thapsus, in Numydia, where he defeated Cato completely. A proud Stoic, Cato, according to the ancient patrician tradition, took his own life rather than endure the shame of defeat. According to Plutarch, Caesar’s response upon hearing news of his suicide was, Cato, I grudge you your death, as you would have grudged me the preservation of your life. A few years later, one of Cato’s sons would participate in Caesar’s assassination.

A statue of Cato the Younger reading Plato’s dialogue Phaedo while preparing to kill himself

By all accounts, Octavian was a sickly teenager. When Caesar was campaigning in Northern Africa in 47 BCE, he asked Octavian to join him, but poor health – and his domineering mother’s intercession – prevented his going, even though it was accepted that part of a young Roman nobleman’s cursus honorum was some form of military service. Caesar was disappointed but accepted that Octavian must safeguard his health, and even went so far as to award Octavian military decorations for the North African campaign.

Following his triumph over Cato, Caesar was feted in Rome, and in the following months, he took the young Octavian, who was performing admirably as pontiff, under his wing. In 45 BCE, Caesar took ship for Iberia, this time to deal with Pompey’s sons, who had escaped to Spain and continued to prove troublesome. He asked Octavian to accompany him, but once again Octavian was too sick to travel.

This time, however, Octavian was determined to join his great-uncle on what promised to be his last major campaign against the optimates. Thus, he embarked upon a private vessel with just a few friends, including Marcus Agrippa, his future general, and sailed for Spain, but he was shipwrecked off the Iberian coast and forced to march across miles of hostile territory to Caesar’s camp, a feat which is said to have greatly impressed him. Caesar succeeded in bringing them to battle at Munda in 45 BCE. Despite being outnumbered almost two to one, Caesar took the offensive and attacked the enemy forces, which were commanded by Pompey’s son Gnaeius Pompeius, and Titus Labenius, Caesar’s onetime ally who had served under Caesar in Gaul and then later defected to Pompey’s side when Caesar had crossed the Rubicon.

Agrippa

After Caesar defeated the rebels at Munda, he returned to Rome with Octavian sharing his own carriage, and the two became so close that people would approach Octavian to ask Caesar for favours, knowing the young man had his great-uncle’s ear. As part of the celebrations for Caesar’s latest victory, he was named consul and dictator for a period of 10 years, and granted the right to nominate new patricians, a power which he used to elevate Octavian (among others) to the utmost rank of the aristocracy. Later that same year, at Caesar’s insistence, Octavian, along with Gaius Maecenas and Marcus Agrippa, his closest friends, travelled to Macedonia,