What if superman had been in the roman empire?

[Jon Clark]

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

How good or bad a dictatorship is depends on the dictator. I'll gladly follow Kal-El's leadership in most of his incarnations, so let's assume he is a perfect leader in this Roman scenario. Now is the same true of Jon Kent? Jon's eventual kids? Is this empire going to descend into a bunch of Kryptonian demi-gods warring over how to run it?

Is our Roman Superman thinking about what happens when he eventually dies? Does he leave an empire that requires a superhuman to rule it, someone able to micromanage with super-speed, and telescopic vision/hearing. A one man legion who has handled military conflicts single-handedly?

Is this world's Pax Supermanica something that will only last as long as Superman lives or is it built to keep the peace even after Superman is no longer there to keep it on track?

[Jon Clark]

Personally I'd have Superman's rocket land in an outlying part of the Empire. My first impulse would be to make it around the 1st century in Judea to involve him in the rise of Christianity and the Judean conflicts like Masada. But I can see where some might be afraid of offending people by having the whole "Jesus" question either confirmed or refuted even in an obviously fictional tale. For myself I just think the idea of having a "real" Superman contrasted to the beliefs of both the Christians and Jews of the time in a messiah would be interesting. Just how would the insertion of a guy who is impervious to harm, superstrong, etc; affect the attempt to put down dissent in Judea.

Is Kal a Roman counterpart to the Jewish messiah whose power is used to counter their beliefs? Is he raised as a Jew and seen as the fulfillment of the prophecies? Do we get a Roman Empire that has Kal-El as it's greatest leader or is a Superman just going to hasten the collapse of the Empire by revolting against it's inherent flaws?

[Agniwolf]

How good or bad a dictatorship is depends on the dictator. I'll gladly follow Kal-El's leadership in most of his incarnations, so let's assume he is a perfect leader in this Roman scenario. Now is the same true of Jon Kent? Jon's eventual kids? Is this empire going to descend into a bunch of Kryptonian demi-gods warring over how to run it?

Is our Roman Superman thinking about what happens when he eventually dies? Does he leave an empire that requires a superhuman to rule it, someone able to micromanage with super-speed, and telescopic vision/hearing. A one man legion who has handled military conflicts single-handedly?

Is this world's Pax Supermanica something that will only last as long as Superman lives or is it built to keep the peace even after Superman is no longer there to keep it on track?

that would be were the justice league fits if in a autocracy, as for the generations to come, seeing as they are impervious to diseases there would be no need for him to have many wives/even more children, so after choosing his heir he would be careful to not impregnate his partner anymore and thus consolidating his heritage avoiding multiple parties meddling, imho the best candidates would be either ww (aliance by marriage) or kara (consolidation through nepotism), lois would only work if a patrician/general daughter. and if possible his heir would already need an arranged marriage with either aquaman/arthur children or batman/brutus (the irony) fo the sake of a more solid base, the emperor would share powers with the league but maintaining his monopoly of powers

[Lightning Rider]

Lois as a general's daughter makes perfect sense eh?

I think ultimately the fact that Superman's rule would leave the people vulnerable and clueless in his absence would make it undesirable for him.

[Agniwolf]

Lois as a general's daughter makes perfect sense eh?

I think ultimately the fact that Superman's rule would leave the people vulnerable and clueless in his absence would make it undesirable for him.

at the bright side, if the basis is well consolidated the empire should last at least 2 thousand years, seeing as the historical one did last 500 even with his many cracks in place

[Jon Clark]

that would be were the justice league fits if in a autocracy, as for the generations to come, seeing as they are impervious to diseases there would be no need for him to have many wives/even more children, so after choosing his heir he would be careful to not impregnate his partner anymore and thus consolidating his heritage avoiding multiple parties meddling, imho the best candidates would be either ww (aliance by marriage) or kara (consolidation through nepotism), lois would only work if a patrician/general daughter. and if possible his heir would already need an arranged marriage with either aquaman/arthur children or batman/brutus (the irony) fo the sake of a more solid base, the emperor would share powers with the league but maintaining his monopoly of powers

Well that keeps the Empire solidified without in-fighting, but again the idea Superman stays benevolent only extends to Superman and the League (maybe Jon too). Assuming Bruce's counterpart pacifies his Gotham- what would you expect once his Damian took the reins as governor of Gotham? And what about the Grandkid of Steel (Jon's heir) are we assured he will not be a tyrant? And what if Arthur, Diana or Barry doesn't hold to the "only one kid" rule- those speedsters show a proclivity for twins after all?

[Agniwolf]

Well that keeps the Empire solidified without in-fighting, but again the idea Superman stays benevolent only extends to Superman and the League (maybe Jon too). Assuming Bruce's counterpart pacifies his Gotham- what would you expect once his Damian took the reins as governor of Gotham? And what about the Grandkid of Steel (Jon's heir) are we assured he will not be a tyrant? And what if Arthur, Diana or Barry doesn't hold to the "only one kid" rule- those speedsters show a proclivity for twins after all?

then he would deal with it as it fits, you could have, for example, him promising one of his children to other kingdoms to make them into political bridges (habsburgs anyone), as for the third generation and so on, the same way it would be unwise to think every descendant would be goody goody, it is also unwise to think them as hateful evils, which certainty do we have that if jon becomes an adult and have kids his kids will be good too in the actual canon? same principle applies here

heck if twins he could actually manage both political marriages with batman and aquamans kids at the same time, it is a win-win

oh and i think pax suprema sounds better (there is a reference too )

[Powerboy]

Personally I'd have Superman's rocket land in an outlying part of the Empire. My first impulse would be to make it around the 1st century in Judea to involve him in the rise of Christianity and the Judean conflicts like Masada. But I can see where some might be afraid of offending people by having the whole "Jesus" question either confirmed or refuted even in an obviously fictional tale. For myself I just think the idea of having a "real" Superman contrasted to the beliefs of both the Christians and Jews of the time in a messiah would be interesting. Just how would the insertion of a guy who is impervious to harm, superstrong, etc; affect the attempt to put down dissent in Judea.

Is Kal a Roman counterpart to the Jewish messiah whose power is used to counter their beliefs? Is he raised as a Jew and seen as the fulfillment of the prophecies? Do we get a Roman Empire that has Kal-El as it's greatest leader or is a Superman just going to hasten the collapse of the Empire by revolting against it's inherent flaws?

I'm not a big fan of the idea that everything Superman will be is dependent on nurture and none on nature. That he will be the ultimate Nazi, for example, because he grows up in 1930s Germany is an interesting story but not how I like to believe Superman would behave. I like to think his core compassion in that scenario would make him the guy who completely breaks the law.

That said, the Roman Empire is interesting because it's certainly not all good or all evil. Would he become Caesar or just the ultimate Roman General? The Christianity factor could be interesting. Although people would be offended, you could actually have him crash in Israel and be raised by a simple carpenter and his wife. The problem I have with that scenario is not religious but philosophical. According to the stories, whether you take them literally or not, Jesus doesn't change the world by performing miracles. He changes the world by his teachings. The miracles are just sort of a little oomph to add credence. But with someone like Superman, I think the powers would become more important unless this becomes a highly philosophical story and you'd better have the best of the best writing it. Superman as a Roman god opposing Christianity (again, regardless of whether it's real or not) sets him up as the villain and the oppressor.

Now Superman long before the time of Christianity taken as a Roman god could be quite interesting.

[Agniwolf]

I'm not a big fan of the idea that everything Superman will be is dependent on nurture and none on nature. That he will be the ultimate Nazi, for example, because he grows up in 1930s Germany is an interesting story but not how I like to believe Superman would behave. I like to think his core compassion in that scenario would make him the guy who completely breaks the law.

That said, the Roman Empire is interesting because it's certainly not all good or all evil. Would he become Caesar or just the ultimate Roman General? The Christianity factor could be interesting. Although people would be offended, you could actually have him crash in Israel and be raised by a simple carpenter and his wife. The problem I have with that scenario is not religious but philosophical. According to the stories, whether you take them literally or not, Jesus doesn't change the world by performing miracles. He changes the world by his teachings. The miracles are just sort of a little oomph to add credence. But with someone like Superman, I think the powers would become more important unless this becomes a highly philosophical story and you'd better have the best of the best writing it. Superman as a Roman god opposing Christianity (again, regardless of whether it's real or not) sets him up as the villain and the oppressor.

Now Superman long before the time of Christianity taken as a Roman god could be quite interesting.

tha is a good question, how would he deal with christianity? would it even exist if pax suprema were in place? as for the option of him being israeli i dont think it fits the image of the roman empire, if so he could very well undo the diaspores and free the region from the empire and restart israeli theocracy, which could, maybe, end in islam not even have the basis to start to exist

[Jon Clark]

I'm not a big fan of the idea that everything Superman will be is dependent on nurture and none on nature. That he will be the ultimate Nazi, for example, because he grows up in 1930s Germany is an interesting story but not how I like to believe Superman would behave. I like to think his core compassion in that scenario would make him the guy who completely breaks the law.

That said, the Roman Empire is interesting because it's certainly not all good or all evil. Would he become Caesar or just the ultimate Roman General? The Christianity factor could be interesting. Although people would be offended, you could actually have him crash in Israel and be raised by a simple carpenter and his wife. The problem I have with that scenario is not religious but philosophical. According to the stories, whether you take them literally or not, Jesus doesn't change the world by performing miracles. He changes the world by his teachings. The miracles are just sort of a little oomph to add credence. But with someone like Superman, I think the powers would become more important unless this becomes a highly philosophical story and you'd better have the best of the best writing it. Superman as a Roman god opposing Christianity (again, regardless of whether it's real or not) sets him up as the villain and the oppressor.

Now Superman long before the time of Christianity taken as a Roman god could be quite interesting.

But the fact Jesus doesn't change the world would be the crux of part of this. For the average inhabitant of Judea except for some promise of a better world after they die, their lives are no better for Christ having been there. If anything for the early Christians it was worse as they had both Rome and the Jewish elders opposed to the movement. Now into that add the appearance of some powerful being who is looking to up-end things. Jesus was content to "render unto Caesar" and while he urged his followers who collected taxes not to be corrupt, he didn't look to reform the tax system. Supremus on the other hand is physically dealing with the local tax collector who is still corrupt. He is rescuing his friends from the gladiatorial games against lions.

So as an average Josephus in Judea, is Christ's teachings more appealing than Supremus' actions? How does a man who actually fights to prevent the Judean Diaspora after Masada compare to a crucified semi-pacifist as a messiah?

How does someone who isn't making a claim of divinity (unlike the emperors and Jesus) but has such powers fit into Roman society? Diana's presence might strengthen the idea of Olympians as gods, but unless they have some hidden motive Zeus & Co aren't claiming Kal-El as a member. And even if he loyally tried to support an existing Emperor, a flying super-strong man inherently undermines the divinity of that emperor by comparison.

[Soubhagya]

Lois as a general's daughter makes perfect sense eh?

I think ultimately the fact that Superman's rule would leave the people vulnerable and clueless in his absence would make it undesirable for him.

Oh and she is also secretly a writer, who rides to wars in disguise. Something like Eowyn of Lord Of The Rings. The one who slayed the Witch King Of Angmar.



Fan art.



Or maybe Mulan. Though i must say i haven't seen that yet. Point is not dragons but that she wants to fight and disguises herself. In those times women were not allowed to fight wars.


I agree about Superman not wishing to leave the world vulnerable. That's why i went ahead and asked the question. What will you do when you win the world? He can do that. There are other options which i am thinking over.

Simply making himself king is not going to work. The empire will crumble in his absence. I made him a thinker, philosopher and a scientist. He would basically popularize the modern ideas and make the world spring to modernity. He nudges the world in this direction. Say some countries will become constitutional monarchies. Renaissance ideas like equality of men, fundamental rights, etc. would be popularized as the government headed by kings would be made more accountable through elected parliaments. This is a boring story for the comics but it can be a fascinating novel.

at the bright side, if the basis is well consolidated the empire should last at least 2 thousand years, seeing as the historical one did last 500 even with his many cracks in place

Superman won't be satisfied with 2000 years. I am not satisfied too. He is then not too different from say founder of an ancient Empire. The problem is that a king of the entire world is even more difficult. It would crumble in one generation. The bigger the empire the more possibility of its failure. Though if you insist on that it's a good story which can be made into a comic book. This is more action packed then my story where Superman basically brings world peace by making all kings his subordinates and then ushers in the modern age.

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.

That's something which requires work. You can't have a good story without conflict. There are two options. Are we setting it in the real world or are we setting it in a world where magic and the supernatural exists? Is Superman the only supernatural being here? Or are there more?

Its important. Because then Amazons won't be existing. They descend from the Greek Gods. Last time i checked Atlantis is a myth. Each setting can bring in a different story. Starting with the setting one can then establish a conflict.

Say for instance if we go with a world with magic you can have a lot of villains who are of magical nature. I can create conflict like this. Science vs Magic. Rational vs Irrational. A small part of the world can be reserved for the villains. Superman had a successful conquest. Most kings agreed to be under him. A few had to be defeated and a favorable monarch established in the respective thrones.

But one region did not bow. It has a lot of magicians and wizards. The battle ended in a standstill. Maybe because the king would rather destroy the kingdom rather then be defeated. Helped by powerful magic he is not easily defeated and can actually kill all people within his kingdom. The people there are kind of blind followers. Not too different from some dictatorships but taken to an extreme level.

In this world magic is a natural talent, irrational and in the hands of the few. Superman focuses on science. Why? Science is but democratization of power. You give power to the people. Instead of depending on some magician to cure a disease medicines cure them. Thus, there is a battle between modernity and tradition. The ideals of equality which science and rational thinking brings versus outdated ideals which are opposite to them as magic supports that. Magic means people are unequal. Some are privileged and others are the common. This theme is the backdrop as those evil villains who mostly are powered by the supernatural fight the idea of the world that Superman envisions.

And of course have those big battles. Luthor may still exist. He is a man of science thus was a friend but did not buy into the ideal of equality. He deserts Superman becomes a sworn enemy and joins the enemy kingdom and helps the magicians even though he is a man of science. Entire DCU can be reworked here. There's one thing i might add. Let Superman not take the crown for himself. He is the most powerful among the Romans but not the king. The administrative work of Rome can be taken up by someone else while he focuses on the larger battle.


Setting it in the real world is more difficult as magic and the supernatural does not apparently exist. Superman has no challenges. You have to reduce his abilities to make an interesting story. Who can even fight Superman in 200 B.C. ?

[Agniwolf]

Oh and she is also secretly a writer, who rides to wars in disguise. Something like Eowyn of Lord Of The Rings. The one who slayed the Witch King Of Angmar.



Fan art.



Or maybe Mulan. Though i must say i haven't seen that yet. Point is not dragons but that she wants to fight and disguises herself. In those times women were not allowed to fight wars.


I agree about Superman not wishing to leave the world vulnerable. That's why i went ahead and asked the question. What will you do when you win the world? He can do that. There are other options which i am thinking over.

Simply making himself king is not going to work. The empire will crumble in his absence. I made him a thinker, philosopher and a scientist. He would basically popularize the modern ideas and make the world spring to modernity. He nudges the world in this direction. Say some countries will become constitutional monarchies. Renaissance ideas like equality of men, fundamental rights, etc. would be popularized as the government headed by kings would be made more accountable through elected parliaments. This is a boring story for the comics but it can be a fascinating novel.



Superman won't be satisfied with 2000 years. I am not satisfied too. He is then not too different from say founder of an ancient Empire. The problem is that a king of the entire world is even more difficult. It would crumble in one generation. The bigger the empire the more possibility of its failure. Though if you insist on that it's a good story which can be made into a comic book. This is more action packed then my story where Superman basically brings world peace by making all kings his subordinates and then ushers in the modern age.



That's something which requires work. You can't have a good story without conflict. There are two options. Are we setting it in the real world or are we setting it in a world where magic and the supernatural exists? Is Superman the only supernatural being here? Or are there more?

Its important. Because then Amazons won't be existing. They descend from the Greek Gods. Last time i checked Atlantis is a myth. Each setting can bring in a different story. Starting with the setting one can then establish a conflict.

Say for instance if we go with a world with magic you can have a lot of villains who are of magical nature. I can create conflict like this. Science vs Magic. Rational vs Irrational. A small part of the world can be reserved for the villains. Superman had a successful conquest. Most kings agreed to be under him. A few had to be defeated and a favorable monarch established in the respective thrones.

But one region did not bow. It has a lot of magicians and wizards. The battle ended in a standstill. Maybe because the king would rather destroy the kingdom rather then be defeated. Helped by powerful magic he is not easily defeated and can actually kill all people within his kingdom. The people there are kind of blind followers. Not too different from some dictatorships but taken to an extreme level.

In this world magic is a natural talent, irrational and in the hands of the few. Superman focuses on science. Why? Science is but democratization of power. You give power to the people. Instead of depending on some magician to cure a disease medicines cure them. Thus, there is a battle between modernity and tradition. The ideals of equality which science and rational thinking brings versus outdated ideals which are opposite to them as magic supports that. Magic means people are unequal. Some are privileged and others are the common. This theme is the backdrop as those evil villains who mostly are powered by the supernatural fight the idea of the world that Superman envisions.

And of course have those big battles. Luthor may still exist. He is a man of science thus was a friend but did not buy into the ideal of equality. He deserts Superman becomes a sworn enemy and joins the enemy kingdom and helps the magicians even though he is a man of science. Entire DCU can be reworked here. There's one thing i might add. Let Superman not take the crown for himself. He is the most powerful among the Romans but not the king. The administrative work of Rome can be taken up by someone else while he focuses on the larger battle.


Setting it in the real world is more difficult as magic and the supernatural does not apparently exist. Superman has no challenges. You have to reduce his abilities to make an interesting story. Who can even fight Superman in 200 B.C. ?

First is that the best choice you superman in this direction would be Kara. They would both be considered gods descended and that would cement his rules.

Secondly being a thinker would at most make him into another name to be studied in philosophy which could be a good thing but I dunno. I kinda don't prefer this scenario

Third if humanity can't guide itself after 2000 years can it even achieve anything on its own at any conceivable time?

Personally democracy is good but it is not the philosophy so perfect to ended all politics but he could achieve the basics in that period

[Soubhagya]

First is that the best choice you superman in this direction would be Kara. They would both be considered gods descended and that would cement his rules.

Kara would be helpful. No doubt about that. Considered Gods is pretty much expected by the people of that time.

Secondly being a thinker would at most make him into another name to be studied in philosophy which could be a good thing but I dunno. I kinda don't prefer this scenario

Oh he is more then just a thinker. A scientist, a warrior, a philosopher, and a writer all rolled into one. Being a thinker is a natural progression when peace is established. He would obviously desire to maintain the peace. Thus, he would dabble in ideas and thoughts. How to keep the world peaceful when he is gone? What are the problems that mankind faces? He would be inventing the printing press on one hand while forming these ideas.

Third if humanity can't guide itself after 2000 years can it even achieve anything on its own at any conceivable time?

Personally democracy is good but it is not the philosophy so perfect to ended all politics but he could achieve the basics in that period

The way i see it is that Superman tries to put systems in place which would continue to work even when he is gone. I am always returning to democracy despite its disadvantages but one can see that democratic governments are accountable to the people. There are more ideas which were developed in Europe during and after the Renaissance period. There is a separation of powers. There are written rules by which government is supposed to function. People are enlightened of their rights. And so on.

Such things are considered to be helpful for a brighter future. People choose their own future. And all this would help. As you said he can establish the foundations of these things when in power. That's pretty much what i am expecting. I know democracy is not perfect. Its foolish to think that it can establish peace. But its something of a lesser evil. At least those misusing their power can be removed when their time is up. And people can participate to improve the systems.

My idea was simply placing Superman 2000 years ago. LOSH shows an optimistic and hopeful future which is there because of Superman. In this way i simply said that Superman of 100 B.C. will simply hasten the progress of mankind. He would be considered as a God. But he would usher in scientific temper and rational thought. It fits into the idea that Superman is The Man Of Tomorrow. If 3000 A.D. is the future for Superman of today, 2000 A.D. resembles a future for Superman of 100 B.C.



That's one scenario. Superman simply establishes an empire can be done too. Its another scenario. An empire for 2000 years is a bright side. I agree with that. Its just my opinion that it is an erroneus choice for Superman. So much can be done when in power to ensure a better and a safer world.

[Agniwolf]

Kara would be helpful. No doubt about that. Considered Gods is pretty much expected by the people of that time.



Oh he is more then just a thinker. A scientist, a warrior, a philosopher, and a writer all rolled into one. Being a thinker is a natural progression when peace is established. He would obviously desire to maintain the peace. Thus, he would dabble in ideas and thoughts. How to keep the world peaceful when he is gone? What are the problems that mankind faces? He would be inventing the printing press on one hand while forming these ideas.



The way i see it is that Superman tries to put systems in place which would continue to work even when he is gone. I am always returning to democracy despite its disadvantages but one can see that democratic governments are accountable to the people. There are more ideas which were developed in Europe during and after the Renaissance period. There is a separation of powers. There are written rules by which government is supposed to function. People are enlightened of their rights. And so on.

Such things are considered to be helpful for a brighter future. People choose their own future. And all this would help. As you said he can establish the foundations of these things when in power. That's pretty much what i am expecting. I know democracy is not perfect. Its foolish to think that it can establish peace. But its something of a lesser evil. At least those misusing their power can be removed when their time is up. And people can participate to improve the systems.

My idea was simply placing Superman 2000 years ago. LOSH shows an optimistic and hopeful future which is there because of Superman. In this way i simply said that Superman of 100 B.C. will simply hasten the progress of mankind. He would be considered as a God. But he would usher in scientific temper and rational thought. It fits into the idea that Superman is The Man Of Tomorrow. If 3000 A.D. is the future for Superman of today, 2000 A.D. resembles a future for Superman of 100 B.C.



That's one scenario. Superman simply establishes an empire can be done too. Its another scenario. An empire for 2000 years is a bright side. I agree with that. Its just my opinion that it is an erroneus choice for Superman. So much can be done when in power to ensure a better and a safer world.

nah you right democracy is good, if he does in fact estabilishes a solid base for it, maybe even going to that in the first thousand years as long as the basis should already be pretty solid by then

however nothing blocks him from having a semi democratic empire, thinking better about it maybe this is the best ending scennario

[Jovos2099]

I can't believe I started such a amazing conversation thanks guys and gals.