Well, it was bound to happen. The son of the first black Roman Emperor (Septimius Severus, born in Libya) gets to co-rule with his father from the tender age of 10 and then becomes sole emperor after his death in 211 AD. The echo is there, isn’t it?
Here’s an early family portrait, with one child’s face obliterated:
Here’s Marcus Aurelius Antoninus’ birth chart:
This chart is rectified to the Saturn event (becoming co-ruler with his father) at age 10. It then allows us to see his becoming sole ruler just before turning 24, when his brother, Geta, was murdered. Lovely family…
Geta’s face is the one missing from the family portrait, above.
In those days, someone could claim to be someone else reborn, and most people would accept it. There may have been a bit of pushback for this claim, though, as Alexander the Great was so admired throughout the world after more than 500 years since his death. But Caracalla was adamant.
According to Wikipedia:
‘After Caracalla concluded his campaign against the Alamanni, it became evident that he was inordinately preoccupied with the Greek-Macedonian general and conqueror Alexander the Great. He began openly mimicking Alexander in his personal style. In planning his invasion of the Parthian Empire, Caracalla decided to arrange 16,000 of his men in Macedonian-style phalanxes, despite the Roman army having made the phalanx an obsolete tactical formation. The historian Christopher Matthew mentions that the term Phalangarii has two possible meanings, both with military connotations. The first refers merely to the Roman battle line and does not specifically mean that the men were armed with pikes, and the second bears similarity to the ‘Marian Mules’ of the late Roman Republic who carried their equipment suspended from a long pole, which were in use until at least the 2nd century AD. As a consequence, the Phalangarii of Legio II Parthica may not have been pikemen, but rather standard battle line troops or possibly Triarii. Caracalla’s mania for Alexander went so far that Caracalla visited Alexandria while preparing for his Persian invasion and persecuted philosophers of the Aristotelian school based on a legend that Aristotle had poisoned Alexander. This was a sign of Caracalla’s increasingly erratic behaviour. But this mania for Alexander, strange as it was, was overshadowed by subsequent events in Alexandria.
‘When the inhabitants of Alexandria heard of Caracalla’s claims that he had killed his brother Geta in self-defence, they produced a satire mocking this as well as Caracalla’s other pretensions. In 215 Caracalla travelled to Alexandria and responded to this insult by slaughtering the deputation of leading citizens who had unsuspectingly assembled before the city to greet his arrival, before setting his troops against Alexandria for several days of looting and plunder.’
Could He Have Really Been Alexander?
One of the ways to prove or disprove the theory is how their birth charts align. Alexander’s Mars is conjunct Caracalla’s Pluto. That’s a strong indicator, for sure. And the double Yod pointing at Caracalla’s Mercury/Venus conjunction is supported by the inconjuncts of the Moon and the Ascendant in Alexander’s chart. Plus, Caracalla’s Sun is inconjunct to Alexander’s Neptune/Midheaven conjunction. Alexander’s Mars is conjunct Caracalla’s Mars, while another Yod points at Caracalla’s Moon, with the inconjuncts of Alexander’s Saturn and Sun. I think it fair to say, Caracalla was right!
I could have also discussed the echo of his assassination at age 29, but we will leave that for another day.