What if superman had been in the roman empire?

[Jovos2099]

I've had some fun imagining what a dc universe set in ancient rome would look like wonder woman for fit in quite nicely so would aquaman how about a flash empowered by mercury or black adam

[Agniwolf]

Not that different from USAans.

The difference lies in the concept of slaying for a greater cause beings outside the empire. A Roman superman could very well lead a legion through the world killing or assimilating barbarians for the sake of justice

[RudHao]

They would've have definitelt found Spartacus body thats for sure.....

[Carabas]

The difference lies in the concept of slaying for a greater cause beings outside the empire. A Roman superman could very well lead a legion through the world killing or assimilating barbarians for the sake of justice

And Superman could have gone and won Vietnam (and the cold war, and basically every conflict the USA ever poked its nose in) all on his own, but didn't.

[Lightning Rider]

The real question becomes about his upbringing, and then a lot of questions unfold from that. How do the Roman versions of the Kents raise him if it's a similar family that finds him in the first place? Is he a noble, a slave, a merchant's son, a poet's son? (The OP does say he's a citizen at least.)

Does Superman try to hide his identity and operate discreetly or does he openly let his abilities be known with no secret civilian persona?

If he does become a public figure, does he stay out of imperial affairs and work for the common good, or try to influence them as an adviser/ally, or outright oppose them?

Does he believe himself to be blessed by the gods as he would no doubt be taught to believe? If so, does he accept worship?

I imagine he becomes a sort of an informal town sheriff and a popular figure in the Empire or Republic. People go to him to settle personal disputes, protect against barbarian raids, help salvage a crucial crop yield, etc. He doesn't directly involve himself in Rome's politics but puts his foot down when he sees authorities abusing their powers against citizens or slaves. He probably reluctantly accepts tribute and prayer and sacrifice and has his own temple. Given he doesn't know his origins at all, he's probably a somewhat lost and tortured soul constantly begging Apollo or Zeus/Jupiter to claim him as their son with no answers in sight. I imagine a story in which a power-hungry politician sees Superman as an obstacle due to directly threatening the symbolic power of the clergy, or the divinity of the Emperor, or for refusing to back Rome's imperial expansion, and threatens him with prayers to the gods (who Superman must believe in to some extent in this circumstance) and/or threatens his loved ones while he is distracted performing some heroic deed (trying to prevent Pompeii?). Turning (some of) the people on him is also in line with this kind of story, perhaps with religious manipulation. Maybe Kryptonite accidentally reveals itself (maybe in some Arena battle for show) and his visible weakness is taken as a sign of divine condemnation. Once he roots out corruption in Rome he doesn't take over but endorses a friendly force for good within government. He then goes off to find Mount Olympus or whatever else might be up there instead, and flies off into space, after telling the people that whether he is truly a god or not, remember how he walked among them and showed them kindness when he had every possibility to take Rome for himself, and to show that benevolence to each other.

Chuck Wonder Woman searching for a lost tribe in the Greek islands in there and after seeking Superman out due to his legend, tells him he's no son of Zeus (Jupiter). And if you must, Batman is a Barbarian Visigoth who Superman lets go after catching him trying to disrupt Roman society once he learns his traumatic story, which in this story substitutes pillaging Legions for Joe Chill. Perhaps on a patrol Superman reluctantly agrees to merely protect, with this episode solidifying his pacifism (and to show Batman being competent at all, maybe another Kryptonite episode occurs by a Kryptonite filled lake in the land he assaults the legion in, causing Batman to state Superman is no god after all, further exacerbating his existential crisis.)

I guess I'm just going to have to write this one day now.

[Lightning Rider]

Side note, I imagine the emperor in this story (which might be Titus) wouldn't be totally against Superman, but wary of him and willing to be convinced to act against him (by greedy politician). I also think it would be cool for Superman to casually advise people of certain small but significant technological advancements, such as military and civil engineers, without committing to the role. Strolling past and telling a builder that the marble is hollow and would benefit from a more advanced mathematical method of construction, or helping pull a catapult with ease before lecturing the generals on the science behind tension and the wood most fit for flexing structurally. No doubt he critiques and debates with the scholars, but again, mostly for fun (not a bad intro scene right before being asked to solve a problem by a needy civilian or child). Maybe he releases a scholarly work of his own which is mostly a series of "cheeky" jabs at existing scholars and philosophers. I'm also imagining his mischievous side coming out and punishing abusive soldiers by giving them wedgies hung from public square pillars.

I'm not to keen on including more league members but a Hawks cameo in Egypt wouldn't hurt too much. Reflecting on Ancient Egyptian religion and wondering if his is true could be a constructive beat.

Is the corrupt politician Vandal Savage? Maybe gives him more reason to distrust Superman's apparent divinity since he's been around since the beginning.

A huge plot twist popped into my head and it's that he returns to Earth in disguise in a brief prologue and one fine Palestinian winter gives shelter to a pregnant couple seeking refuge... but that is probably a bad idea for many many reasons.

[Soubhagya]

Well done Bogotazo! I was thinking somewhat in this direction. I was in the upbringing part and you went too far ahead.

Let me add that he falls in love with the daughter of a general who is secretly a writer and often rides to wars under disguise named Lois and marries her after sometime.



Basically this but make some requisite changes. For instance no glasses or guns. (Guns could be added after Superman invents them). Earlier she could be in disguise like Gwendolyn from Lord of the Rings. After marriage this costume is pretty neat. No need to hide then.

How he is brought up is important. There are various possibilities.

Crowning himself king makes all sense. Its one possibility.



Since, he wants to help others the best way is to make himself the king of the world at that time. Wars used to be more frequent and kings would be but robbers in disguise. He would fight them and establish kings who were at least concerned about the well being of the people and don't ride into wars for no reason. He might not take the crown himself. He is humble in pretty much all incarnations. Crown or not he is going to be the most powerful person in the kingdom and the world. And his first important step is conquering the world and establishing a semblance of order by having one emperor of the world and other being subordinates. These kings would be free in all respects as long as they don't misuse their powers.

After establishing peace he would focus on one aspect of work which he was doing but not truly focusing upon. He could be one who makes great contributions to various branches of knowledge. He would read the previous works from all parts of the world, discuss with the intelligensia of that time and make lasting contributions for the world at large. Science, philosophy, will get a tremendous boost. He might establish constitutional monarchies too knowing that the world won't be able to keep its peace if there is not someone like him.

These ideas which we find pretty simple: rule of the law, equality, free speech, etc. can rise. Either he makes them up or finds them from older thinkers. I am sure he is going to be a prolific writer with books on many subjects.

To make this interesting bring on those villains. Luthor could still be there. A crazy inventor makes more sense. Capitalism was there but it was not so dominant that one can actually control cities by being a crazy rich merchant. He could make some villains like Bizzaro, Metallo, etc. Braniac can be a wizard or perhaps a space wizard. Heroes have to be fit into this setting. WW is a natural fit. Cyborg has to be reworked.

So, overall my story is that Superman establishes peace by his might. These things like American Way was not present at that time. But later he would give the power back to the people. He's a thinker and is intelligent. He would invent the American way if its not there.

This requires a humble upbringing by the Kents. If he grows up among corrupt kings he would become a king for life and world would be quite different.




And being king would work then. Not now if someone wants to use this to justify an injustice.

[Agniwolf]

And Superman could have gone and won Vietnam (and the cold war, and basically every conflict the USA ever poked its nose in) all on his own, but didn't.

different contexts

[Agniwolf]

Well done Bogotazo! I was thinking somewhat in this direction. I was in the upbringing part and you went too far ahead.

Let me add that he falls in love with the daughter of a general who is secretly a writer and often rides to wars under disguise named Lois and marries her after sometime.



Basically this but make some requisite changes. For instance no glasses or guns. (Guns could be added after Superman invents them). Earlier she could be in disguise like Gwendolyn from Lord of the Rings. After marriage this costume is pretty neat. No need to hide then.

How he is brought up is important. There are various possibilities.

Crowning himself king makes all sense. Its one possibility.



Since, he wants to help others the best way is to make himself the king of the world at that time. Wars used to be more frequent and kings would be but robbers in disguise. He would fight them and establish kings who were at least concerned about the well being of the people and don't ride into wars for no reason. He might not take the crown himself. He is humble in pretty much all incarnations. Crown or not he is going to be the most powerful person in the kingdom and the world. And his first important step is conquering the world and establishing a semblance of order by having one emperor of the world and other being subordinates. These kings would be free in all respects as long as they don't misuse their powers.

After establishing peace he would focus on one aspect of work which he was doing but not truly focusing upon. He could be one who makes great contributions to various branches of knowledge. He would read the previous works from all parts of the world, discuss with the intelligensia of that time and make lasting contributions for the world at large. Science, philosophy, will get a tremendous boost. He might establish constitutional monarchies too knowing that the world won't be able to keep its peace if there is not someone like him.

These ideas which we find pretty simple: rule of the law, equality, free speech, etc. can rise. Either he makes them up or finds them from older thinkers. I am sure he is going to be a prolific writer with books on many subjects.

To make this interesting bring on those villains. Luthor could still be there. A crazy inventor makes more sense. Capitalism was there but it was not so dominant that one can actually control cities by being a crazy rich merchant. He could make some villains like Bizzaro, Metallo, etc. Braniac can be a wizard or perhaps a space wizard. Heroes have to be fit into this setting. WW is a natural fit. Cyborg has to be reworked.

So, overall my story is that Superman establishes peace by his might. These things like American Way was not present at that time. But later he would give the power back to the people. He's a thinker and is intelligent. He would invent the American way if its not there.

This requires a humble upbringing by the Kents. If he grows up among corrupt kings he would become a king for life and world would be quite different.




And being king would work then. Not now if someone wants to use this to justify an injustice.

i doubt you would believe it, but not every king is an evil robber, and most reasons for war are for the maintenance of the peace, conquering and pillaging included

it is very hard to impose our actual values of what is right and wrong over a time wereas circunstances disctated the moral and imoral/right and wrong in a total different way than today

[Soubhagya]

i doubt you would believe it, but not every king is an evil robber, and most reasons for war are for the maintenance of the peace, conquering and pillaging included

it is very hard to impose our actual values of what is right and wrong over a time wereas circunstances disctated the moral and imoral/right and wrong in a total different way than today

I agree with you that every that every king was not a 'robber'. But a lot of them were. To satisfy greed they would simply collect taxes and live in luxury. Others would simply want to fight wars to expand territories. I am sure that's most of the kings.

If all kings were doing their jobs they would exist even today. Most countries don't have kings. They were taken down by force. Others were forced to change. Something like constitutional monarchy.

So, the first step is relatively simple. Agree to be under one single emperor of the world. Keep your flag and independence. But when you step out of line (war or complete neglect of subjects) expect a visit. This world conquering involves victories which do not necessarily involve war. Intelligent kings would agree to this arrangement. They are pretty much free in all respects. But if they involve in wars they demand attention. If the people are suffering greatly. Say there's droughts but king is neglecting to do the job of a king it demands attention. Otherwise they are free.

The next step is the bigger battle. He has to learn all this stuff. Equality, rule of law, etc. Some ideas were there earlier too. Some have to be made. I said Superman would do all this stuff. He is not someone who is a fool as people think of him. He is quite a thinker and intelligent himself. By reading earlier works, by discussions with other thinkers and by plain thinking and writing he would make large contributions of knowledge. It may happen. It may not happen. But its possible. I went with the optimistic possibilities.

The further steps are going to be more difficult. How these ideas can be taught to people in general? You have to have something akin to renaissance period. People have to learn such stuff. How he would do this? I left it in the air. One i don't actually know the changes in detail what made these ideas popular as kingdoms made way to constitutional monarchies. Second its an imaginary scenario. And even under imaginary scenarios people in general can't be forced to change. These ideas have to win. Having people elected into assemblies which can advice the kings. Have laws by which countries can be ruled. This requires people to be involved. How to do that? I left it to Superman. He is supposed to be super intelligent with a strong moral compass with requisite strength to back it up.

One thing is creating those ideas. I gave that job to Superman. Next to teach those ideas to people in general. That requires strength with proper intelligence. I assumed its there in Superman. Not necessarily going to happen. But can happen. Some kings would allow changes in governance. Others not so. They require prodding. Its a boring story so i skipped to the end with optimistic projections.

Crux of my idea was that there would be good kings. They are free as long as they don't step out of line. Other steps i mentioned is what else will Superman do after he has established peace in general? Invent stuff. In fields of science and knowledge. He will try to make changes in the world. How much successful he would be in the next step that depends on a lot of things. Cooperative kings would make it easier. Cooperation does not necessarily mean subjugation.

Back then it was a simpler time. Power was at the tip of the sword. The world was ruled by kings in general. Nowadays who knows where power is. The government? The businesses? The media? The people? Thus, establishing peace by might would be easier during Roman era then today.

I also assumed that Superman is capable enough to defeat entire armies literally by himself. Second, he is pretty intelligent. Finally, the most important thing is he has a strong moral core.

[Agniwolf]

I agree with you that every that every king was not a 'robber'. But a lot of them were. To satisfy greed they would simply collect taxes and live in luxury. Others would simply want to fight wars to expand territories. I am sure that's most of the kings.

If all kings were doing their jobs they would exist even today. Most countries don't have kings. They were taken down by force. Others were forced to change. Something like constitutional monarchy.

So, the first step is relatively simple. Agree to be under one single emperor of the world. Keep your flag and independence. But when you step out of line (war or complete neglect of subjects) expect a visit. This world conquering involves victories which do not necessarily involve war. Intelligent kings would agree to this arrangement. They are pretty much free in all respects. But if they involve in wars they demand attention. If the people are suffering greatly. Say there's droughts but king is neglecting to do the job of a king it demands attention. Otherwise they are free.

The next step is the bigger battle. He has to learn all this stuff. Equality, rule of law, etc. Some ideas were there earlier too. Some have to be made. I said Superman would do all this stuff. He is not someone who is a fool as people think of him. He is quite a thinker and intelligent himself. By reading earlier works, by discussions with other thinkers and by plain thinking and writing he would make large contributions of knowledge. It may happen. It may not happen. But its possible. I went with the optimistic possibilities.

The further steps are going to be more difficult. How these ideas can be taught to people in general? You have to have something akin to renaissance period. People have to learn such stuff. How he would do this? I left it in the air. One i don't actually know the changes in detail what made these ideas popular as kingdoms made way to constitutional monarchies. Second its an imaginary scenario. And even under imaginary scenarios people in general can't be forced to change. These ideas have to win. Having people elected into assemblies which can advice the kings. Have laws by which countries can be ruled. This requires people to be involved. How to do that? I left it to Superman. He is supposed to be super intelligent with a strong moral compass with requisite strength to back it up.

One thing is creating those ideas. I gave that job to Superman. Next to teach those ideas to people in general. That requires strength with proper intelligence. I assumed its there in Superman. Not necessarily going to happen. But can happen. Some kings would allow changes in governance. Others not so. They require prodding. Its a boring story so i skipped to the end with optimistic projections.

Crux of my idea was that there would be good kings. They are free as long as they don't step out of line. Other steps i mentioned is what else will Superman do after he has established peace in general? Invent stuff. In fields of science and knowledge. He will try to make changes in the world. How much successful he would be in the next step that depends on a lot of things. Cooperative kings would make it easier. Cooperation does not necessarily mean subjugation.

im sorry but most countries dont have monarchies because of the cold war and not because most were robbers,

constitutional monarchy is still monarchy and mos of the gratest developed countries are monarchies, even qatar which is absolutist is more developed both economicaly and socialy than most republics and that is with sharia active, imagine without it

republic on the other hand was able to be the most corrupt system in the present time, full of scandals and "legitimate", democratic supressions

we are sold the "democracy is better, republic is righteous" because we live in those systems and have to handwave our problems when comparing to others system for a sense of legitimacy, hen "most kings were robbers" which is a lie because how could they rob themselves? "oh but the taxes and luxury" as if any politician in the world except for mujica dont wastes millions in taxes by livings luxurious lifes, also most monarchies around the world receive lots less than democratic politicians their advantage and luxury comes from administering their inheritances better than our short term congressmans and senators

the list goes on, and there are plenty evil monarch in the course of 12000 years of humanity, the catch is that in 300 years of contemporary democracies combined they are almost at the same range of corruption of 12000 years of monarchies combined

[Soubhagya]

im sorry but most countries dont have monarchies because of the cold war and not because most were robbers,

constitutional monarchy is still monarchy and mos of the gratest developed countries are monarchies, even qatar which is absolutist is more developed both economicaly and socialy than most republics and that is with sharia active, imagine without it

republic on the other hand was able to be the most corrupt system in the present time, full of scandals and "legitimate", democratic supressions

we are sold the "democracy is better, republic is righteous" because we live in those systems and have to handwave our problems when comparing to others system for a sense of legitimacy, hen "most kings were robbers" which is a lie because how could they rob themselves? "oh but the taxes and luxury" as if any politician in the world except for mujica dont wastes millions in taxes by livings luxurious lifes, also most monarchies around the world receive lots less than democratic politicians their advantage and luxury comes from administering their inheritances better than our short term congressmans and senators

the list goes on, and there are plenty evil monarch in the course of 12000 years of humanity, the catch is that in 300 years of contemporary democracies combined they are almost at the same range of corruption of 12000 years of monarchies combined

Well who knew there's a view like this. I am glad to hear from you. You make intelligent observations and not just go with the crowd. I like it.

What if i say democracy is over rated? You can't expect democracy to be a silver bullet. Those democratic governments often do the job of governance worse then monarchies. The thing is i can't say which is the perfect form of government. As per the flow of history and the attendant growth of ideas apparently democracy is a better form of government. I am not hundred percent sure about that. Today its the view of the majority, hundred years from now it might not be so. One thing i can say is that 'Elected government is the lesser evil'. Why? Those rulers who want to exploit people can be removed. I guess this makes it better then monarchy as of now. A king can be good too. But a king might be bad. That's quite possible. Tbh its possible even in democracy. But before such a person can do lasting damage, he or she can be removed.

About luxury and taxation i am simply stating the job of a king. A king's job is to collect money from the people in form of taxes and use them for their benefit. I have no problems with kings having luxurious lives as long as all people are gainfully employed and are in general well taken care of. Luxurious life of kings is existent even in democratic governments aren't they? They fly in jet planes, ride in cars, have small armies as security personnel and so on. They are kings too.

Its a whole topic of discussion. Which form of government is better? I went with the pessimistic view here and assumed that most kings would not do their jobs in the long run. A king is a servant of the people. He is supposed to see to it that people are happy. They are properly working as per their skills and nature. Justice is given. They are kept secure. His subjects are kind of his children. Its applicable to any form of government.

Assuming a democratic government is always better i went with the possibility that the Roman Superman will try to establish that. By his super brain he can surely find the better way. I am not a claimant that i have perfect knowledge. But i expect Superman to have that. All Star Superman hinted that he can see everything in connection to each other. So, if a solution between this debate is to be found Superman is in a great position for that. People can't imagine that he has intelligence/super brain backed by a strong sense of moral caliber and humanity. If the best answer is democracy he would reach that conclusion.

And being a man of action he will try to implement that. This is what he does. Using his abilities to help people. He is someone who does the right thing till his final breath.

[Agniwolf]

Well who knew there's a view like this. I am glad to hear from you. You make intelligent observations and not just go with the crowd. I like it.

What if i say democracy is over rated? You can't expect democracy to be a silver bullet. Those democratic governments often do the job of governance worse then monarchies. The thing is i can't say which is the perfect form of government. As per the flow of history and the attendant growth of ideas apparently democracy is a better form of government. I am not hundred percent sure about that. Today its the view of the majority, hundred years from now it might not be so. One thing i can say is that 'Elected government is the lesser evil'. Why? Those rulers who want to exploit people can be removed. I guess this makes it better then monarchy as of now. A king can be good too. But a king might be bad. That's quite possible. Tbh its possible even in democracy. But before such a person can do lasting damage, he or she can be removed.

About luxury and taxation i am simply stating the job of a king. A king's job is to collect money from the people in form of taxes and use them for their benefit. I have no problems with kings having luxurious lives as long as all people are gainfully employed and are in general well taken care of. Luxurious life of kings is existent even in democratic governments aren't they? They fly in jet planes, ride in cars, have small armies as security personnel and so on. They are kings too.

Its a whole topic of discussion. Which form of government is better? I went with the pessimistic view here and assumed that most kings would not do their jobs in the long run. A king is a servant of the people. He is supposed to see to it that people are happy. They are properly working as per their skills and nature. Justice is given. They are kept secure. His subjects are kind of his children. Its applicable to any form of government.

Assuming a democratic government is always better i went with the possibility that the Roman Superman will try to establish that. By his super brain he can surely find the better way. I am not a claimant that i have perfect knowledge. But i expect Superman to have that. All Star Superman hinted that he can see everything in connection to each other. So, if a solution between this debate is to be found Superman is in a great position for that. People can't imagine that he has intelligence/super brain backed by a strong sense of moral caliber and humanity. If the best answer is democracy he would reach that conclusion.

And being a man of action he will try to implement that. This is what he does. Using his abilities to help people. He is someone who does the right thing till his final breath.

i know that not only you but lots of others will disagree with me on that, but if we really take superman's inteligence into acount and he really is bent on greater welfare for the people, then the best system he could apply would be either autocracy or police state, because with those he could directly involve himself in a grater promotion of development and justice without fearing too much backlash from other parties

i agree with most of what you said, but we also need to remember that in a different context of time some kind of oppression was even expected by the people as what is taken as a good ruler. have you read the prince? it is a great book on how goodness and cruelty are necessary on a healty goverment for the sake of people at that time, as controversial as that may sound in our day and age

[Soubhagya]

i know that not only you but lots of others will disagree with me on that, but if we really take superman's inteligence into acount and he really is bent on greater welfare for the people, then the best system he could apply would be either autocracy or police state, because with those he could directly involve himself in a grater promotion of development and justice without fearing too much backlash from other parties

i agree with most of what you said, but we also need to remember that in a different context of time some kind of oppression was even expected by the people as what is taken as a good ruler. have you read the prince? it is a great book on how goodness and cruelty are necessary on a healty goverment for the sake of people at that time, as controversial as that may sound in our day and age

I haven't read Prince. But i do agree that sometimes for governance steps are taken which are at first appearances cruel. Its just like a doctor's surgery. It can be cruel but its for the best of the patient. Its knife used differently from a killer. This is one disadvantage of democracy. Its difficult to make long term plans when its expected that your government is lasting for 4-5 years. Leaders often make populist choices instead of making the right one. But it requires great wisdom. Its difficult to pull off consistently for years. Oppression? Now that's something i am not sure. They always strike back. Maybe it worked then. I do see an advantage of a strong empire in the middle ages. Many kingdoms means possibility of warfare is increased. I am not sure though. One thing i know that it should not be the basis even in the older ages. Anything built upon that crumbles. That is why i gave the option of conquering often without warfare in my original post.

About Superman taking power for himself is best choice, let us agree to disagree. For that to work Superman has to continue to be a humble servant of the people. It can be done. He belongs to the sky but does not think himself above us but rather as one of us. The biggest problem is that he can't stay forever. If his successor turns out to not be like him or if he himself loses his way then Earth is a goner. About police state i am even more unsure. So much power in one man's hands even if perfect is not possible. Surely there are other people involved. Can they be trusted? I am doubtful.

Edit: A good ruler punishes his officials who are misusing their limited powers. So that reason can be taken care of. But the longevity stays a problem.

[Lightning Rider]

Superman as Emperor or King could work but between Red Son (well-intentioned dictator) and Injustice (evil dictator) we have a lot of themes covered. Having a truly liberal (in the sense of power) Superman ruling would be interesting but there needs to be some conflict there.