Could History Have Changed if M.Anthony Skipped a Single Line?

[omoplata]

This may seem like a small detail, but one I find extremely interesting.

 

When Marc Anthony, Brutus and the whole lot were assembled at Caesar's funeral, Anthony started to read the will of Caesar, as you all know. Why did Anthony not modify Caesar's will and simply remove the reference to Octavius? This would have made him the unquestionable and very much sole heir to Caesar.

 

3 reasons I think this would have been exceptionally easy to do and would attract no suspicion at all are

 

1- Caesar had only met Octavius one time.

2- Octavius was only 18 yrs old

Due to these two reasons, it is unlikely anyone would have suspected foul play when the name of Octavius didn't come up in the will (and when it did, people were quite shocked)

 

3- Brutus and Cassius were unaware that the will would even have been read and thus were were unlikely to have known its content.

 

Add to this the fact that Alexander, a hero of Caesar, refused to appoint a heir. Caesar could have very well left the succession issue open and unanswered much like Alexander the Great.

 

Anthony would not even have to insert his own name into the will as, in the absence of Octavius, he would have been the sole center of power by default.

 

 

The fact that he did not doctor such a simple and potentially monumental change can be due to a few reasons:

 

-He had tremendous respect for Caesar and couldn't bring himself to do it

-Precisely because Octavius was such an insignificant character at the time, he saw no need

-The record keeping mechanism at Rome was such that even the strongest and most influential Roman alive couldn't have done such a thing.

-Others had already seen the will and would've called him out.

 

What else.... what part of my analysis is wrong? Please critique

Thanks

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

I think your analysis is pretty much spot on and you raise some interesting and thought provoking questions all of which are fully plausable.

 

 

 

Personally I'm leaning towards the fact that Antony totally underestimated the young and as you say insignificant Octavious played a massive roll in Antony not attempting to modify Caesar's will to his favour, Antony probably thought that he'd be able to manipulate Octavius and eventually take control of the Republic as and when he wished which was obviously a massive misjudgement on his behalf a fact which I'm sure he regretted to the day he died!!

 

 

 

A great post, although we will never know the answer you can't beat a good what if??

[Melvadius]

We may need someone more expert in Latin and/or Roman will formats to say whether any of our speculations make sense but I can try making a couple of slightly different guesses:

 

Possibly it has something to do with how Roman wills were made.

 

If it had been made as a 'military' will then there would probably have been a series of witnesses seals attached to it confirming that they had witnessed it being signed. In addition it would probably have been held privately and securely until it was about to be read out so Marc Antony may not have been able to read it before-hand.

 

Possibly he simply got caught out by the sentence structure not expecting what Octavian was being granted so missed the opportunity to change names or what was being granted. It is also possible with so famous a persons will that there would have been an expectation that it was displayed publically. If that was so he could have said what he liked but as soon as it was posted and the general public had a chance to read it they would have known that he had lied.

[Dickonbard]

Roman wills had to be signed in the presence of seven witnessed or declared publicly in a forum or before a court.

 

The will would have been written in ink on parchment or papyrus. In either case, it was possible for a scribe to rub the surface off the writing material and correct an error, but impossible to do so in a way that would avoid detection if the document were examined. And Caesar's will would certainly have been scrutised closely - not so much because people were interested in who his 'political heir' was, but because he was a very wealthy man.

 

Being caught doctoring a will would have struck Roman public opinion as an unpleasant offence. It was disrespectful to the desd, even if they did not happen to be the divus Julius.

 

So, even if he had been tempted to try it, Antony would quickly have thought better of it.

 

But it's a nice idea to toy with - particularly, if we imagine Antony substituting the name of Brutus or Caesarion. Either of those would really have set the cat amongst the pigeons!

[omoplata]

Roman wills had to be signed in the presence of seven witnessed or declared publicly in a forum or before a court.

 

The will would have been written in ink on parchment or papyrus. In either case, it was possible for a scribe to rub the surface off the writing material and correct an error, but impossible to do so in a way that would avoid detection if the document were examined.

 

It is impossible not to be so very impressed with the Roman system. How safe and immune to manipulation many facets of social life were is just amazing.

Then again, even under such circumstances, the republic could not last. Such is the undying force of human greed; like the water that wears away the hardest of rocks, it can wear away the strongest of social institutions...

[caldrail]

it was also Roman practice to read wills beofre the writer had died. This was done to please friends and family (one hopes) with knowledge of what they might expect. I can't remember the anecdote off hand but I do recall one such reading at a dinner party causing some upset.

 

Now obviously I don't know if Caesars will was already known but given his status it probably isn't too hard to believe that at some point it was. Although there would be a risk of a sudden death and a very happy recipient of the wills contents (such things were hinted in the early empire) it would also mean that any unexpected content would immediately raise suspicion, so doctoring the will in this case would need to be somewhat sneakier (Robert Graves weaves a tale about how Livia did this with Augustus's last will and testament in I Claudius)

[Maty]

There's also the consideration that Caesar had already publicly declared Octavian to be his heir(and shipped him safely abroad under the protection of a friendly legion). If he reversed this decision, he would be expected to do so publicly.

 

So even if it were possible, changing an heir in a will would be highly suspicious, and probably damage Antony more than it helped.

 

(Note that Antony could and did creatively re-interpret some of Caesar's other post-mortem plans, especially with regard to political appointments.)

[Kosmo]

The content of the will of Marcus Antonius himself was known to Octavian, who made public his content outraging the citizens.

It is clear that Romans had ways to certify the authenticity of a will, including witnesses and safekeeping in a temple.

[caldrail]

I remember the anecdote now. It was roman practice not only to impart wordly goods to new owners but also to name individuals and tell everyone what you actually thought of them in life. Unfortunately at one dinner party the guests asked for the hosts will to be read. Knowing what was in it, he politely refused, but on the insistence of his guests and one precocoius young man in particular, he diceded to after all and unfortunately the opinions of the host to that individual were not well received.