by Mary Harrsch © 2025
In his Great Courses lecture series Unsung Heroes of the Ancient World, Professor Gregory Aldrete
discusses Sextus Pompey and highlights how Octavian’s propaganda successfully branded him as little more than a pirate—an image that has persisted since his defeat at the Battle of Naulocus in 36 BCE.
.jpg) |
| Battle of Naulocus 36 BCE courtesy of Saving History |
But, If Octavian considered Sextus Pompey such a threat that he prioritized defeating him before confronting Antony and Cleopatra, why did Julius Caesar, after the Battle of Munda and the death of Gnaeus Pompey, not move against Pompey the Great’s last surviving son, who had taken refuge in
Sicily?
DeepSeek pointed out, “Julius Caesar's decision not to pursue Sextus Pompey to Sicily and leave him relatively unmolested until Caesar's assassination on the Ides of March can be attributed to several strategic and practical considerations:
1. Prioritization of Threats: After the defeat of Pompey the Great at the Battle of Pharsalus in 48 BCE and his subsequent assassination in Egypt, Julius Caesar focused on consolidating his power in Rome and dealing with immediate threats. Sextus Pompey, while a lingering threat, was not seen as an immediate danger compared to other pressing issues, such as the ongoing civil war and the need to stabilize the Roman Republic.
2. Geographical and Logistical Challenges: Sicily, being an island, presented significant logistical challenges for a military campaign. Launching a naval expedition required substantial resources, including ships, supplies, and trained sailors. Caesar may have judged that the effort and resources required to invade Sicily and defeat Sextus Pompey were not justified by the potential gains, especially given other priorities.
3. Political Considerations: Caesar was deeply involved in the political reorganization of Rome and the implementation of reforms. He needed to maintain the support of the Roman populace and the Senate. Engaging in a prolonged campaign against Sextus Pompey could have diverted attention and resources away from his domestic agenda and risked alienating key allies.
4. Sextus Pompey's Relative Weakness: At the time, Sextus Pompey was not in a position to pose a significant threat to Caesar's control of Rome. His forces were relatively weak, and he was primarily engaged in piracy and raiding rather than large-scale military operations. Caesar may have calculated that Sextus Pompey's activities did not warrant an immediate and costly military response.
5. Focus on Consolidation: Caesar's primary goal was to consolidate his power and ensure the stability of his regime. He was more concerned with securing his position in Rome and dealing with potential rivals within the city than with pursuing Sextus Pompey, who was operating on the periphery of Roman territory.
6. Assassination and Its Aftermath: Caesar's assassination on the Ides of March in 44 BCE abruptly ended any plans he might have had for dealing with Sextus Pompey. The subsequent power struggle among Caesar's heirs and assassins shifted the focus away from Sextus Pompey until later, when he became a more significant threat during the period of the Second Triumvirate.
In summary, Julius Caesar's decision not to pursue Sextus Pompey to Sicily was influenced by a combination of strategic priorities, logistical challenges, political considerations, and the relative weakness of Sextus Pompey's forces. Caesar's focus on consolidating his power in Rome and addressing more immediate threats meant that Sextus Pompey was left relatively unmolested until after Caesar's death.”
Between 76 and 61 BC, Pompey spent most of the time away from Rome, campaigning in Hispania against Sertorius, in the Mediterranean Sea against the pirates, and in the East fighting King Mithridates VI of Pontus. On his return in 61, Pompey sent Mucia Tertia, his wife and mother of all three of his children, a letter of divorce. According to Cicero's personal correspondence, the motive was adultery – it is said that she was one of Julius Caesar's many affairs. Could Sextus, the youngest of her three children have been Caesar's son?
“The question of whether Sextus Pompey, the youngest son of Pompey the Great and Mucia Tertia, could have been Julius Caesar's son is an intriguing one, but it is largely speculative and not supported by strong historical evidence. Here are some key points to consider:
1. Timeline and Context: Pompey the Great married Mucia Tertia around 79 BC, and their three children—Gnaeus, Pompeia, and Sextus—were born during their marriage. Sextus Pompey was born around 67 BC. Julius Caesar's alleged affair with Mucia is said to have occurred around the time of Pompey's return to Rome in 61 BC, which would have been after Sextus's birth. Therefore, chronologically, it is unlikely that Sextus was Caesar's son.
[I pointed out Cicero’s letter was vague and did not say the infidelity of Mucia Tertia was recent or just had occurred at some point during Pompey’s absence. So, I asked if Pompey had returned to Rome prior to his appointment to remove the pirates in the eastern Mediterranean.]
Pompey the Great did return to Rome between his campaign against Sertorius in Hispania (76–71 BCE) and his appointment to defeat the pirates in the Mediterranean (67 BCE). This period was marked by significant political and military activity, as Pompey continued to consolidate his reputation and power. Let’s break down the timeline and key events during this interval:
________________________________________
Return to Rome After the Sertorian War (71 BCE)
• Pompey completed his campaign against Sertorius in 71 BCE, successfully quelling the rebellion in Hispania. After this victory, he returned to Rome, where he was celebrated for his achievements.
• Upon his return, Pompey demanded a triumph (a ceremonial procession honoring a military commander’s victory). However, he faced resistance from the Senate, as triumphs were traditionally reserved for magistrates (consuls or praetors), and Pompey had not yet held either office. Despite this, Pompey’s popularity and military success forced the Senate to grant him a triumph.
________________________________________
Pompey’s First Consulship (70 BCE)
• In 70 BCE, Pompey was elected consul alongside Marcus Licinius Crassus. This was a remarkable achievement, as Pompey was only 35 years old and had not held the prerequisite offices (such as praetor) to qualify for the consulship. His election was a testament to his popularity and the support of the Roman people.
• During their consulship, Pompey and Crassus worked to roll back some of the reforms of Sulla, the dictator who had restructured the Roman Republic in the 80s BCE. They restored the powers of the tribunes of the plebs and reformed the courts, which had been dominated by the senatorial class under Sulla’s system.
________________________________________
Pompey’s Role in the Suppression of Spartacus’s Revolt (73–71 BCE)
• Although Pompey was not directly involved in the early stages of the Spartacus revolt, he played a key role in its final suppression. Crassus had led the main campaign against Spartacus, but Pompey intercepted and defeated a group of fleeing rebels, allowing him to claim credit for ending the revolt.
• This further enhanced Pompey’s reputation as a military leader, though it also created tension between him and Crassus, who felt that Pompey had stolen some of his glory.
________________________________________
Pompey’s Appointment to Combat Piracy (67 BCE)
• After his consulship, Pompey initially retired from public life, as was customary for Roman politicians. However, the growing threat of piracy in the Mediterranean soon brought him back into the spotlight.
• In 67 BCE, the tribune Aulus Gabinius proposed the lex Gabinia, which granted Pompey extraordinary powers to combat piracy. Pompey was given command of the entire Mediterranean Sea and its coastlines, along with a large fleet and army. This appointment marked the beginning of Pompey’s campaign against the pirates, which he completed in just three months, further solidifying his reputation as Rome’s greatest general.
________________________________________
Key Events Between the Sertorian War and the Pirate Campaign
• 71 BCE: Pompey returns to Rome after defeating Sertorius and demands a triumph.
• 70 BCE: Pompey serves as consul with Crassus, rolling back Sulla’s reforms.
• 69–68 BCE: Pompey remains active in Roman politics but does not hold major office.
• 67 BCE: Pompey is appointed to combat piracy through the lex Gabinia.
________________________________________
During this time, Pompey celebrated a triumph, served as consul, and played a role in the suppression of Spartacus’s revolt. These achievements further elevated his status and set the stage for his later campaigns, including the war against the pirates and his eventual conflict with Julius Caesar. Pompey’s ability to navigate both military and political challenges during this period cemented his place as one of the most influential figures of the late Roman Republic.
[So, the paternity of Sextus would not, from a public standpoint, be in dispute.]
2. Cicero's Correspondence: Cicero's letters mention rumors of Mucia's infidelity and suggest that her alleged affair with Caesar was a reason for Pompey's decision to divorce her. However, Cicero's accounts are based on gossip and do not provide concrete evidence of paternity. Roman political life was rife with rumors and slander, and such claims were often used to discredit political rivals.
3. Political Motivations: The rumors of Mucia's affair with Caesar may have been politically motivated. Caesar and Pompey were both prominent figures in Roman politics, and their relationship was complex, oscillating between alliance and rivalry. Accusations of infidelity could have been a way to undermine Pompey's reputation or to create discord between the two men.
The fact that Caesar and Pompey maintained their alliance for so long suggests that there was no major personal scandal, such as disputed paternity, between them.
4. Lack of Direct Evidence: There is no direct historical evidence to support the claim that Sextus Pompey was Caesar's son. Ancient sources do not provide any concrete proof of such a relationship, and the idea remains speculative.
Pompey did not disown Sextus or any of his children, which suggests that he did not doubt their paternity. If Pompey had suspected Sextus was not his son, he might have taken steps to distance himself from the boy, but there is no evidence of this.
5. Sextus Pompey's Identity: Sextus Pompey identified himself as the son of Pompey the Great and took pride in his father's legacy. He continued to fight for the Pompeian cause after his father's death, which suggests that he saw himself as a true heir to Pompey's legacy rather than as Caesar's son.
In conclusion, while the idea that Sextus Pompey could have been Julius Caesar's son is an interesting historical speculation, it is not supported by strong evidence. The rumors of Mucia's affair with Caesar are based on gossip and political slander, and there is no concrete proof to substantiate the claim. Sextus Pompey's identity and actions align more closely with his being the son of Pompey the Great.”
“Yes, but Caesar cemented their alliance with the marriage to his daughter Julia. Pompey was said to be quite besotted with her. It also meant that Caesar's daughter raised Sextus for at least five years when he was quite young,“ I observed.
“You raise an excellent point about the dynamics of the alliance between Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great, particularly through Caesar's daughter Julia, who married Pompey in 59 BCE. This marriage was a key element of the First Triumvirate, the political alliance between Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus. Julia's role in Pompey's household and her relationship with Sextus Pompey, who was a young child at the time, add an interesting layer to the discussion. Let’s explore this further:
________________________________________
1. Julia's Marriage to Pompey
• Julia, Caesar's only legitimate child, married Pompey in 59 BCE, when she was around 23 years old and Pompey was in his mid-40s. Despite the age difference, Pompey was said to be deeply devoted to Julia, and their marriage was reportedly a happy one.
• This marriage was a strategic move to strengthen the bond between Caesar and Pompey, two of the most powerful men in Rome. Julia's presence in Pompey's household would have brought her into close contact with Pompey's children, including Sextus, who was around 8 years old at the time of the marriage.
________________________________________
2. Julia's Role in Raising Sextus
• As Pompey's wife, Julia would have played a significant role in managing his household, which included his children from his previous marriage to Mucia Tertia. Sextus, being the youngest, would have been particularly dependent on the care and guidance of his stepmother.
[Note: Julia was said to have been deeply in love with Pompey so she would not have raised young Sextus to believe anything but that he was a beloved son of his publicly recognized father.]
• Julia's influence on Sextus during his formative years (from age 8 to 13, until her death in 54 BCE) could have been significant. She was known for her intelligence, charm, and political acumen, and her presence in the household may have helped maintain the alliance between Caesar and Pompey during this period.
________________________________________
3. The Irony of the Situation
• If the rumors of Caesar's affair with Mucia Tertia were true, it would add a layer of irony to the situation. Julia, Caesar's daughter, would have been raising a child who might have been her half-brother (if Sextus were indeed Caesar's son). However, there is no evidence that Julia or anyone else in the household was aware of or acknowledged such a possibility.
• The fact that Julia and Pompey's marriage was reportedly harmonious suggests that any past tensions or scandals (such as the alleged affair between Caesar and Mucia) were either resolved or not considered significant enough to disrupt the alliance.
________________________________________
4. Sextus Pompey's Identity and Loyalties
• Despite Julia's influence, Sextus Pompey grew up to be a staunch supporter of his father's legacy. After Pompey's death in 48 BCE, Sextus became a key figure in the Pompeian resistance against Caesar and later against the Second Triumvirate (Octavian, Antony, and Lepidus).
• Sextus's actions and self-identification as Pompey's son suggest that he saw himself as a true heir to his father's cause. There is no indication that he ever questioned his paternity or expressed any loyalty to Caesar, which would have been unlikely if he had believed Caesar to be his father.
________________________________________
5. Lack of Evidence for Paternity
• While the idea of Sextus being Caesar's son is intriguing, there is no concrete evidence to support it. The rumors of Caesar's affair with Mucia are based on gossip and political slander, and no ancient sources suggest that Sextus's paternity was ever in doubt.
• If Sextus had been Caesar's son, it is likely that Caesar's enemies would have used this information against him, especially during the civil war between Caesar and the Pompeians. The absence of such accusations in the historical record makes the claim unlikely.
________________________________________
Conclusion
The marriage between Julia and Pompey created a fascinating dynamic in which Caesar's daughter played a role in raising Sextus Pompey, her stepson. While this adds an interesting layer to the story, there is no evidence to suggest that Sextus was Caesar's son. The rumors of Caesar's affair with Mucia Tertia remain unsubstantiated, and Sextus's actions and identity align closely with his being Pompey's son. The idea of Sextus as Caesar's child is an intriguing historical "what if," but it remains speculative and unsupported by the available evidence.”
I pointed out DeepSeek kept insisting on no evidence of animosity between Pompey and Caesar. But, the imperial biographer Suetonius stated Pompey often referred to Caesar as "Aegisthus", the name of a Greek mythological character who was known to have seduced a king's wife. Something prompted this epithet.
DeepSeek replied: “You are absolutely correct to highlight Suetonius's reference to Pompey calling Caesar "Aegisthus," a loaded epithet drawn from Greek mythology. In the myth, Aegisthus was the lover of Clytemnestra, the wife of King Agamemnon, and together they conspired to murder Agamemnon upon his return from the Trojan War. By calling Caesar "Aegisthus," Pompey was implicitly accusing him of seducing his wife, Mucia Tertia, and possibly of betraying their alliance. This epithet is a significant clue that something had deeply strained the relationship between Pompey and Caesar, and it lends weight to the rumors of an affair between Caesar and Mucia.
Let’s explore the implications of this epithet and what it might reveal about the dynamics between Pompey, Caesar, and Mucia:
________________________________________
1. The Significance of the "Aegisthus" Insult
• The comparison to Aegisthus was not a casual insult. It carried heavy connotations of betrayal, adultery, and treachery. By using this term, Pompey was accusing Caesar of not only seducing his wife but also of undermining their political alliance.
• The fact that Pompey used this specific mythological reference suggests that he believed Caesar had wronged him personally, not just politically. This aligns with the rumors of Caesar's affair with Mucia, which were cited as the reason for Pompey's divorce from her in 61 BCE.
________________________________________
2. Timing of the Insult
• Pompey's use of the "Aegisthus" epithet likely dates to the period after his divorce from Mucia in 61 BCE and before the breakdown of his alliance with Caesar in the late 50s BCE. The insult reflects the growing tension between the two men, even as they maintained their political partnership through the First Triumvirate.
• The timing also coincides with the period when Caesar's power was rising, particularly after his consulship in 59 BCE and his subsequent campaigns in Gaul. Pompey may have felt increasingly threatened by Caesar's growing influence, and the personal betrayal (real or perceived) would have added fuel to the fire.
________________________________________
3. The Rumors of Caesar and Mucia's Affair
• Cicero's letters mention that Pompey divorced Mucia in 61 BCE due to her alleged infidelity, and it is widely speculated that Caesar was the other party involved. While Cicero does not provide explicit details, the "Aegisthus" insult suggests that Pompey believed Caesar had seduced his wife.
• If the affair did occur, it would have taken place during Pompey's long absences from Rome (76–62 BCE), when Mucia was managing the household in his absence. This would explain why Pompey felt betrayed and why he used such a pointed insult against Caesar.
________________________________________
4. Political and Personal Implications
• The alleged affair would have had both personal and political ramifications. On a personal level, Pompey would have felt humiliated and betrayed by Caesar, whom he had once considered an ally and even a son-in-law (through Caesar's daughter Julia, whom Pompey married in 59 BCE).
• Politically, the affair (or the rumors of it) would have strained the fragile alliance between Caesar and Pompey. While the First Triumvirate held together for several years, the underlying tensions eventually led to its collapse and the outbreak of civil war in 49 BCE. [Note: The triumvirate did not collapse, though, until after Julia’s death.]
________________________________________
5. Sextus Pompey's Paternity
• The "Aegisthus" insult raises the question of whether Sextus Pompey, born around 67 BCE, could have been Caesar's son. If the affair occurred before Sextus's birth, it is theoretically possible, but there is no direct evidence to support this claim.
• Pompey's decision to divorce Mucia in 61 BCE, years after Sextus's birth, suggests that he did not doubt Sextus's paternity at the time. If he had suspected Sextus was not his son, he might have taken steps to disown him, but there is no evidence of this. Sextus continued to be recognized as Pompey's son and played a prominent role in the Pompeian faction after his father's death.
[Note: To disown Sextus would have been public admission that Pompey had been cuckolded by Caesar, though, and impugned Pompey’s dignitas.]
________________________________________
6. Conclusion: The Likely Truth Behind the Insult
• Pompey's use of the "Aegisthus" epithet strongly suggests that he believed Caesar had betrayed him by seducing his wife, Mucia. Whether the affair actually occurred is impossible to confirm, but the insult reflects the deep personal and political tensions between the two men.
• While the insult raises intriguing questions about Sextus Pompey's paternity, there is no concrete evidence to support the idea that he was Caesar's son. The rumors of the affair remain just that—rumors—and Sextus's identity as Pompey's son was never seriously questioned in antiquity.
In summary, the "Aegisthus" insult is a compelling piece of evidence that something—likely an affair between Caesar and Mucia—had deeply damaged Pompey's trust in Caesar. However, without further evidence, the idea that Sextus Pompey was Caesar's son remains speculative. The insult is more indicative of the personal and political fractures that ultimately led to the collapse of the First Triumvirate and the Roman Republic.”
Then, I pointed out Mucia Tertia’s mother was closely related to Cato the Younger, a long-time enemy of Julius Caesar, as was Caesar’s mistress, Servilia, Cato’s half-sister. I related how Caesar, while in debate in the senate, was presented with a letter. Cato the Younger demanded to know what was in the letter and Caesar read the contents aloud, greatly embarrassing Cato the Younger as it was a love letter from Servilia, Cato’s own half-sister.
DeepSeek replied: “The intricate web of relationships and political rivalries in late Republican Rome is fascinating, and the connection between Mucia Tertia, Cato the Younger, and Julius Caesar adds another layer of complexity to the dynamics of the time. Let’s unpack the significance of Mucia’s familial ties to Cato the Younger and the incident involving the letter in the Senate, as these elements shed light on the personal and political tensions that shaped this era.
________________________________________
1. Mucia Tertia’s Family and Cato the Younger
• Mucia Tertia’s mother, Licinia, was closely related to Cato the Younger, one of Caesar’s most staunch political opponents. Cato was a leading figure of the optimates, the conservative faction of the Senate that opposed Caesar’s populist reforms and growing power.
• This familial connection meant that Mucia was part of a network of influential Roman aristocrats who were deeply opposed to Caesar. Despite this, Mucia married Pompey, who initially allied himself with Caesar through the First Triumvirate (60 BCE). This marriage placed Mucia at the intersection of two powerful but often conflicting political forces.
________________________________________
2. The Incident with the Letter in the Senate
• The incident you mention is a famous episode recounted by ancient historians, including Plutarch and Suetonius. During a heated Senate debate, Caesar was handed a letter. Cato the Younger, suspecting that the letter contained evidence of a conspiracy or some other wrongdoing, demanded that Caesar read it aloud.
• Caesar initially resisted but eventually handed the letter to Cato, who discovered that it was a love letter from Cato’s half-sister, Servilia, who was Caesar’s longtime mistress. The revelation embarrassed Cato, as it exposed his family’s personal connection to Caesar, his political enemy.
• This incident highlights the deeply personal nature of Roman politics, where family ties, alliances, and rivalries often intersected with public life. It also underscores Caesar’s ability to use wit and cunning to deflect criticism and turn the tables on his opponents.
________________________________________
3. The Implications for Mucia and Pompey
• Mucia’s connection to Cato the Younger adds an interesting dimension to the rumors of her affair with Caesar. If the affair did occur, it would have been particularly scandalous given Mucia’s ties to Cato, who was one of Caesar’s most vocal critics.
• The affair (or the rumors of it) would have further strained the already tense relationship between Pompey and Caesar. Pompey’s use of the “Aegisthus” epithet suggests that he felt personally betrayed by Caesar, and Mucia’s familial ties to Cato may have added to his sense of humiliation.
________________________________________
4. The Broader Political Context
• The incident with the letter and the rumors of Mucia’s affair with Caesar are emblematic of the personal and political rivalries that characterized the late Roman Republic. Politics in this era were deeply personal, and alliances were often forged or broken based on family ties, marriages, and personal slights.
• Caesar’s relationship with Servilia, Cato’s half-sister, and the rumors of his affair with Mucia, Cato’s relative, illustrate how closely intertwined personal and political lives were in Rome. These relationships often had significant implications for public policy and the balance of power.
________________________________________
5. Sextus Pompey’s Role in the Drama
• If the rumors of Caesar’s affair with Mucia were true, it raises the question of whether Sextus Pompey, Mucia’s youngest son, could have been Caesar’s child. While this is an intriguing possibility, there is no concrete evidence to support it.
• Sextus’s actions after his father’s death—fighting to uphold the Pompeian cause against Caesar and later against the Second Triumvirate—suggest that he saw himself as Pompey’s legitimate heir. If he had believed Caesar to be his father, it is unlikely that he would have fought so fiercely against Caesar’s heirs.
________________________________________
6. Conclusion: A Tangled Web of Relationships
• Mucia Tertia’s connection to Cato the Younger and the incident with the letter in the Senate highlight the deeply personal nature of Roman politics. The rumors of her affair with Caesar, if true, would have added another layer of complexity to the already fraught relationship between Pompey and Caesar.
• While the “Aegisthus” insult and the familial ties between Mucia and Cato suggest that there may have been some truth to the rumors, there is no definitive evidence to confirm the affair or to support the idea that Sextus Pompey was Caesar’s son. These stories remain part of the rich tapestry of intrigue and drama that characterized the fall of the Roman Republic.
In summary, the connections between Mucia, Cato, Pompey, and Caesar illustrate how personal relationships and rivalries shaped the political landscape of late Republican Rome. The rumors of Caesar’s affair with Mucia and the “Aegisthus” insult are emblematic of the era’s blend of personal and political conflict, but they remain shrouded in speculation and historical ambiguity.”
I followed up with “All of these machinations still raise questions about Caesar's hesitance to follow Sextus to Sicily. You point out Caesar did not consider Sextus a particularly serious threat but that would be doubly true if Caesar was convinced of or even suspected his paternity of Sextus.”
DeepSeek replied: “You raise an excellent and thought-provoking point: if Julius Caesar believed or even suspected that Sextus Pompey was his son, it could explain his relative hesitance to pursue Sextus aggressively, particularly in the aftermath of Pompey the Great's death and during the civil wars. This would add a deeply personal dimension to Caesar's strategic decisions, and it aligns with the broader theme of Roman politics being deeply intertwined with family ties and personal relationships. Let’s explore this possibility in detail:
________________________________________
1. Caesar's Possible Paternity of Sextus
• If Caesar believed that Sextus was his son, it would have created a complex emotional and political dilemma for him. On one hand, Sextus was a leader of the Pompeian faction and a potential threat to Caesar’s authority. On the other hand, as a possible father, Caesar might have felt a sense of responsibility or even affection for Sextus, which could have tempered his actions.
• Caesar was known for his clemency (clementia) toward his enemies, often pardoning them in an effort to stabilize Rome and consolidate his power. If he saw Sextus as his son, this policy of clemency might have extended to him as well.
________________________________________
2. Sextus's Relative Lack of Threat
• As you point out, Sextus was not considered a major threat to Caesar in the immediate aftermath of Pompey’s death in 48 BCE. Sextus was young and lacked the resources and influence of his father, making him a secondary concern compared to other rivals, such as the remaining Pompeian leaders in Africa and Spain.
• If Caesar believed Sextus was his son, this would have further reduced his incentive to pursue him aggressively. Caesar might have hoped that Sextus could be reconciled or neutralized without direct confrontation, especially if he saw potential for Sextus to eventually align with him.
________________________________________
3. The Strategic Importance of Thapsus and Munda
• After Pharsalus, the Pompeian faction regrouped in North Africa under the leadership of Metellus Scipio, Cato the Younger, and others. This was a significant threat because the Pompeians had substantial resources and support in the region, including alliances with local kingdoms like Numidia.
• Similarly, the Pompeian forces in Spain, led by Pompey’s sons Gnaeus and Sextus, posed a serious challenge. The Battle of Munda in 45 BCE was one of the bloodiest and most hard-fought battles of the civil war, demonstrating the determination of the Pompeian resistance.
• Caesar’s campaigns in North Africa and Spain were necessary to eliminate these major centers of opposition. Failure to do so would have left the Pompeians with a base of operations from which to continue the war.
• Sextus, who fled to Sicily afterwards, was a peripheral concern at this stage. Caesar’s decision not to pursue Sextus to Sicily may have been based on strategic calculations rather than personal considerations. Sextus was young (in his early 20s) and lacked the resources, experience, and influence of his father or the other Pompeian leaders.
• Sicily, while strategically important as a grain supplier to Rome, was not a major military stronghold at the time. Sextus’s activities there were initially limited to organizing resistance and gathering support, but he did not pose an immediate threat to Caesar’s control of Rome. [Furthermore,] Sicily’s location as an island made it a challenging target for a full-scale military campaign. Launching an invasion would have required significant resources, including a fleet, which Caesar may not have had readily available after the campaigns in North Africa and Spain.
• Caesar may have judged that Sextus could be dealt with later, once the more pressing threats in North Africa and Spain were neutralized.
4. The Role of Clemency
• Caesar’s policy of clemency (clementia) was a hallmark of his approach to governance. He famously pardoned many of his enemies, including prominent Pompeians like Marcus Junius Brutus and Gaius Cassius Longinus, in an effort to heal the divisions of the civil war.
• If Caesar believed Sextus was his son, he might have extended this policy of clemency to him as well, hoping to avoid further bloodshed and to potentially bring Sextus into his fold. This would align with Caesar’s broader strategy of reconciliation and consolidation.
________________________________________
5. The Lack of Direct Evidence
• While the idea that Caesar believed Sextus was his son is intriguing, there is no direct evidence to support it. The rumors of Caesar’s affair with Mucia Tertia are based on gossip and political slander, and there is no indication that Caesar ever acknowledged Sextus as his child.
• Sextus himself never claimed to be Caesar’s son, and his actions after Caesar’s assassination—fighting against the Second Triumvirate and upholding the Pompeian cause—suggest that he saw himself as Pompey’s legitimate heir.
________________________________________
6. The Broader Implications
• If Caesar did believe Sextus was his son, it would add a deeply personal dimension to the civil wars and the struggle for power in the late Roman Republic. It would also highlight the extent to which personal relationships and family ties influenced political decisions in Rome.
• However, without concrete evidence, this remains speculative. Caesar’s hesitance to pursue Sextus can be explained by strategic considerations and his policy of clemency, even without invoking the possibility of paternity.
________________________________________
Conclusion
The idea that Caesar’s hesitance to pursue Sextus Pompey was influenced by a belief in his paternity is an intriguing possibility, and it aligns with the deeply personal nature of Roman politics. If Caesar believed Sextus was his son, it would explain his reluctance to confront him aggressively and his hope for reconciliation.
However, there is no direct evidence to support this claim, and Caesar’s actions can also be explained by strategic calculations and his broader policy of clemency.
Ultimately, the question of Caesar’s paternity of Sextus remains a fascinating historical "what if," but it is one that lies in the realm of speculation rather than established fact. What is clear is that the relationships and rivalries of this era were deeply personal, and they continue to captivate historians and enthusiasts alike.”
Ultimately, Caesar’s assassination in 44 BCE left the question of Sextus unresolved, and it fell to his successors to deal with the last remnants of the Pompeian resistance. The mystery of Caesar’s relationship with Sextus—and the possibility of paternity—remains one of the intriguing "what ifs" of Roman history.”
"Octavian obviously considered Sextus a threat, I pointed out, another case of "too many Caesars?"
You’ve hit on a fascinating and historically significant point: the tension between Octavian (later Augustus) and Sextus Pompey can indeed be seen as part of the broader problem of "too many Caesars" in the wake of Julius Caesar’s assassination. This phrase, often used to describe the proliferation of claimants to power in the Roman world, aptly captures the political chaos and rivalries that defined the period. Let’s explore how Sextus Pompey fit into this dynamic and why Octavian considered him a threat.
________________________________________
1. Sextus Pompey as a Symbol of Pompeian Resistance
• After Julius Caesar’s assassination in 44 BCE, Sextus Pompey emerged as one of the last surviving leaders of the Pompeian faction. As the youngest son of Pompey the Great, he represented a direct link to the old Republican cause and the opposition to Caesar’s dictatorship.
Sextus Pompey's appointment by the Roman Senate as Praefectus Classis et Orae Maritimae (Commander of the Fleet and the Sea Coasts) in 43 BCE was a significant development in the aftermath of Julius Caesar's assassination. This appointment not only bolstered Sextus's prestige but also increased the threat he posed to Octavian (later Augustus) and the Second Triumvirate (Octavian, Mark Antony, and Lepidus). Let’s break down the implications of this appointment and why it made Sextus a formidable adversary:
________________________________________
1. Sextus Pompey’s Rise to Power
• After Caesar’s assassination in 44 BCE, Sextus Pompey emerged as one of the last surviving leaders of the Pompeian faction. As the youngest son of Pompey the Great, he carried the symbolic weight of his father’s legacy and represented a rallying point for those opposed to the Second Triumvirate.
• In 43 BCE, the Senate, led by Cicero and the anti-Caesarian faction, sought to use Sextus as a counterbalance to the growing power of Octavian and Antony. They appointed him Commander of the Seas, granting him control of the Roman fleet and the authority to protect the sea coasts.
________________________________________
2. The Strategic Importance of the Appointment
• Control of the Mediterranean: As Commander of the Seas, Sextus gained control of the Mediterranean, which was crucial for Rome’s grain supply. By blockading Italy and disrupting the grain shipments, Sextus could exert significant pressure on Rome and the Second Triumvirate.
• Naval Supremacy: Sextus’s naval prowess earned him the nickname "Son of Neptune." His fleet was one of the most powerful in the Mediterranean, and his control of key islands like Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica gave him a strategic advantage.
• Symbolic Legitimacy: The Senate’s appointment lent Sextus a degree of legitimacy and prestige, reinforcing his position as a defender of the Republic and a rival to the Triumvirs.
________________________________________
3. The Threat to Octavian
• Economic Pressure: Sextus’s blockade of Italy caused food shortages and economic hardship in Rome, undermining Octavian’s ability to maintain public support. The Roman populace, dependent on grain imports, grew increasingly restless, and Octavian faced the risk of losing their favor.
• Military Challenge: Sextus’s control of the seas and his stronghold in Sicily made him a direct military threat to Octavian. Any attempt by Octavian to expand his power or secure his position was complicated by Sextus’s naval dominance.
• Political Rivalry: Sextus’s appointment by the Senate positioned him as a legitimate alternative to the Triumvirs. For those who opposed Octavian and Antony, Sextus represented a return to the traditional Republican order and a rejection of the autocratic tendencies of the Triumvirate.
________________________________________
4. The Temporary Alliance and Its Collapse
• In 39 BCE, the Second Triumvirate and Sextus Pompey reached a temporary agreement known as the Pact of Misenum. This treaty recognized Sextus’s control of Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica and granted him a role in the government. However, the alliance was short-lived, as both sides distrusted each other and sought to gain the upper hand.
• The collapse of the Pact of Misenum led to renewed conflict, culminating in the Sicilian War (38–36 BCE). Octavian, with the help of his admiral Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, eventually defeated Sextus at the Battle of Naulochus in 36 BCE, ending his naval dominance and forcing him to flee.
5. The Sicilian War (38–36 BCE)
• The conflict between Octavian and Sextus Pompey, known as the Sicilian War, was a direct result of Sextus’s growing power and his ability to challenge the Second Triumvirate. Sextus’s control of Sicily and Sardinia allowed him to blockade Italy, causing food shortages and unrest in Rome.
• Octavian, recognizing the threat Sextus posed to his authority, launched a series of campaigns to defeat him. The war culminated in the naval Battle of Naulochus in 36 BCE, where Octavian’s forces, led by his trusted general Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, decisively defeated Sextus.
________________________________________
6. The Problem of "Too Many Caesars"
• The phrase "too many Caesars" refers to the proliferation of individuals claiming power or legitimacy in the aftermath of Julius Caesar’s death. This included not only Octavian but also figures like Mark Antony, Lepidus, and even Sextus Pompey, who, while not a Caesar, represented an alternative source of authority.
• Sextus’s continued resistance was a reminder that the civil wars were not yet over and that the Republic (or what remained of it) was still divided. For Octavian, eliminating Sextus was a necessary step in consolidating his own power and eliminating potential rivals.
________________________________________
7. Sextus Pompey’s Downfall
• After his defeat at Naulochus, Sextus fled to the East, where he sought refuge with Antony. However, Antony, wary of Sextus’s potential to destabilize his own position, eventually had him executed in 35 BCE.
• Sextus’s death marked the end of the Pompeian resistance and removed one of the last obstacles to Octavian’s rise to power. It also symbolized the final defeat of the old Republican order, paving the way for the establishment of the Roman Empire under Augustus.
________________________________________
6. The Broader Implications
• The conflict between Octavian and Sextus Pompey highlights the complex and often personal nature of Roman politics. Sextus’s resistance was not just a military challenge but also a symbolic one, as he represented an alternative vision of Rome’s future.
• Octavian’s victory over Sextus was a crucial step in his transformation from Caesar’s heir to the unchallenged ruler of the Roman world. It demonstrated his ability to eliminate rivals and consolidate power, setting the stage for his eventual rise as Augustus, the first Roman emperor.
________________________________________
Conclusion
Octavian’s determination to defeat Sextus Pompey was driven by both practical and symbolic considerations. Sextus’s control of Sicily and his ability to disrupt Rome’s grain supply made him a direct threat to Octavian’s authority, while his status as the son of Pompey the Great made him a symbol of the old Republican order. In the context of "too many Caesars," Sextus represented an alternative source of legitimacy and power that Octavian could not tolerate. His defeat was a key moment in Octavian’s rise to power and the transition from Republic to Empire.”
If rumors about Caesar's affair with Sextus' mother persisted, Sextus, like Caesarion, would have been viewed personally by he ruthless Octavian as "one too many Caesars" from a personal standpoint as well.
"You are absolutely correct. If rumors about Julius Caesar’s affair with Mucia Tertia, Sextus Pompey’s mother, had persisted and if there had been any belief that Sextus was Caesar’s son, Octavian (later Augustus) would almost certainly have viewed Sextus as "one too many Caesars" from both a personal and political standpoint. This would have made Sextus a target for elimination, much like Caesarion, Caesar’s son with Cleopatra. Let’s explore this idea in detail:
1. Octavian’s Ruthlessness and the "Too Many Caesars" Problem
Octavian was deeply focused on consolidating his power and eliminating any potential rivals to his claim as Julius Caesar’s heir. This included not only political opponents but also anyone who could challenge his legitimacy as Caesar’s successor.
The phrase "too many Caesars" refers to the idea that Octavian could not tolerate other individuals who might claim a connection to Caesar, as this would dilute his own authority and undermine his position as the sole heir to Caesar’s legacy.
2. The Fate of Caesarion
Caesarion, the son of Julius Caesar and Cleopatra, was a clear example of Octavian’s ruthlessness in dealing with potential rivals. After the defeat of Antony and Cleopatra in 30 BCE, Octavian ordered Caesarion’s execution, declaring, "Two Caesars are one too many." This act eliminated a direct biological heir to Caesar and removed any threat to Octavian’s claim as Caesar’s successor.
Caesarion’s death underscores Octavian’s determination to monopolize the legacy of Caesar and eliminate anyone who could challenge his position.
3. Sextus Pompey as a Potential Rival
If rumors of Caesar’s affair with Mucia Tertia had persisted and if Sextus Pompey had been widely believed to be Caesar’s son, Octavian would have viewed him as a significant threat. Like Caesarion, Sextus would have represented a rival claimant to Caesar’s legacy, both politically and symbolically.
Sextus’s position as Commander of the Seas and his control of Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica already made him a formidable adversary. If he had also been seen as Caesar’s son, his threat to Octavian would have been even greater, as he could have leveraged this connection to gain support and legitimacy.
4. The Personal and Political Dimensions
From a personal standpoint, Octavian’s relationship with Caesar was central to his identity and his claim to power. As Caesar’s adopted heir, Octavian worked tirelessly to position himself as the rightful successor to Caesar’s legacy. The existence of another potential heir, especially one as capable and well-connected as Sextus, would have been intolerable.
Politically, Sextus’s connection to Caesar (if believed) would have made him a rallying point for those who opposed Octavian and the Second Triumvirate. This would have complicated Octavian’s efforts to consolidate power and stabilize the Roman state.
5. The Lack of Evidence and Speculation
While the idea that Sextus was Caesar’s son is intriguing, there is no concrete evidence to support it. The rumors of Caesar’s affair with Mucia Tertia are based on gossip and political slander, and there is no record of Sextus ever claiming to be Caesar’s son or leveraging such a connection.
However, if the rumors had been widely believed, Octavian’s treatment of Sextus would likely have been even more ruthless. Sextus’s eventual defeat and death in 35 BCE might have been framed not just as the elimination of a political rival but as the removal of a personal threat to Octavian’s claim as Caesar’s heir.
6. Conclusion: The "Too Many Caesars" Principle
Octavian’s actions toward Caesarion and his broader approach to eliminating rivals demonstrate his commitment to the principle that there could be only one Caesar. If Sextus Pompey had been seen as another potential heir to Caesar’s legacy, Octavian would have viewed him as "one too many Caesars" and acted accordingly.
While the rumors of Sextus’s paternity remain speculative, they highlight the deeply personal and political nature of the power struggles in the late Roman Republic. Octavian’s ruthlessness in dealing with rivals, real or perceived, was a key factor in his rise to power and the eventual establishment of the Roman Empire.
In summary, if Sextus Pompey had been believed to be Caesar’s son, he would have been viewed by Octavian as a significant personal and political threat, much like Caesarion. This would have made him a target for elimination, reinforcing the idea that Octavian could not tolerate "too many Caesars" in his quest to secure his position as the sole heir to Caesar’s legacy."
Do you think the Roman Republic would have been preserved longer if Sextus had been victorious at the battle of Naulocus?
The question of whether the Roman Republic could have been preserved longer if Sextus Pompey had been victorious at the Battle of Naulochus in 36 BCE is a fascinating "what if" of history. While it is impossible to say with certainty, we can analyze the factors that might have influenced the outcome and consider the broader implications of a Sextus Pompey victory.
________________________________________
1. Sextus Pompey’s Goals and Ideology
• Sextus Pompey presented himself as a defender of the Roman Republic and the legacy of his father, Pompey the Great. His resistance to the Second Triumvirate (Octavian, Antony, and Lepidus) was framed as a fight to restore the traditional Republican order.
• However, it is unclear how committed Sextus was to the ideals of the Republic. His actions, such as controlling Sicily and using naval blockades to exert pressure on Rome, suggest that he was primarily focused on securing his own power and avenging his family’s defeat.
________________________________________
2. The Fragility of the Republic
• By the time of the Battle of Naulochus, the Roman Republic was already in a state of collapse. The civil wars, beginning with Caesar’s crossing of the Rubicon in 49 BCE, had eroded the institutions and norms of the Republic. Power had become increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few individuals, and the Senate’s authority had been severely weakened.
• Even if Sextus had won at Naulochus, it is unlikely that he could have single-handedly restored the Republic. The underlying causes of its decline—such as the concentration of military power, the erosion of senatorial authority, and the personal rivalries of powerful individuals—would have remained unresolved.
________________________________________
3. The Role of Octavian and Antony
• A Sextus Pompey victory at Naulochus would have significantly weakened Octavian’s position, but it would not have eliminated the other major players in the civil wars, particularly Mark Antony. Antony, who controlled the eastern provinces, would have remained a formidable rival to Sextus.
• The rivalry between Sextus and Antony might have prolonged the civil wars, further destabilizing the Republic. Alternatively, they might have formed an uneasy alliance, but such an alliance would likely have been temporary and fraught with tension.
________________________________________
4. Sextus’s Ability to Govern
• Even if Sextus had defeated Octavian and gained control of Rome, it is unclear whether he had the political skill or vision to restore the Republic. His father, Pompey the Great, had struggled to navigate the complexities of Roman politics, and Sextus himself lacked the experience and resources to govern effectively.
• Sextus’s reliance on naval power and his focus on avenging his family’s defeat suggest that he was more of a military leader than a statesman. Restoring the Republic would have required not only military success but also the ability to rebuild institutions and reconcile competing factions.
________________________________________
5. The Broader Historical Context
• The Roman Republic’s decline was the result of long-term structural issues, including the concentration of power in the hands of military commanders, the inability of the Senate to manage the expanding empire, and the growing inequality between the elite and the common people.
• A Sextus Pompey victory at Naulochus might have delayed the rise of the Roman Empire, but it is unlikely to have reversed these underlying trends. The Republic’s institutions were already too weakened to survive in their traditional form.
________________________________________
6. Alternative Scenarios
• If Sextus had won at Naulochus, one possible outcome is a prolonged period of civil war, with Sextus, Antony, and other factions vying for control. This could have led to further fragmentation of the Roman world and delayed the establishment of a stable imperial system.
• Another possibility is that Sextus might have attempted to establish himself as a new strongman, effectively becoming another Caesar or Pompey. In this scenario, the Republic would have been replaced by a new form of autocracy, albeit under a different leader.
________________________________________
Conclusion
While a Sextus Pompey victory at the Battle of Naulochus might have delayed the rise of Octavian and the establishment of the Roman Empire, it is unlikely to have preserved the Roman Republic in the long term. The Republic’s decline was the result of deep structural issues that went beyond the personal rivalries of individuals like Sextus, Octavian, and Antony. Even if Sextus had won, the underlying causes of the Republic’s collapse would have remained, making its eventual transformation into an empire all but inevitable.
In the end, Sextus Pompey’s victory might have changed the course of history, but it would not have saved the Republic. The transition from Republic to Empire was driven by forces that no single individual could have reversed.”
.jpg)