What are the possible ways for the Roman Empire to prevent civil

Don't be an empire, be a republic.

Only allow land-owning citizens to serve in the legions.

That way, they won't pillage their own homes on behalf of some general.

Clone and re-use Augustus over and over

>>2706932

Grant independence to french territories and brittish territories that drain the state's money and keep Spain and North Africa.

Take inflation out of the equation by not changing the silver quantity per coin.

Go back to charging a flat tax. In case you dont understand a flat tax is a tax that remains in its percentage no matter how much you make. So 10% of 100 is 10. 10% of 1000 is 100. Under this system the amount the state needed to charge out of a worker was 2 days of work per year.

Repress culture that is contradictory to Roman culture.

Do not grant citizenship in order to raise more from taxes. Grant citizenship to those converted to Roman or Greek or Iberian values.

>>2706932
They could have listened to Gracchus so that the Marian reforms were not necessary.

>>2706947
>Don't be an empire, be a republic.
The Romans were always an empire since the foundations were really layed during the First Punic War. Secondly, the entire reason the Roman society transitioned from a republic to a principate/empire was due to rampant civil wars, corruption of the senate and other elected officials, and the advent of more dictators or consuls who were tyrant like dictators such as Marius, Sulla, etc...The last 120 or so years of republican Rome is marked by constant civil wars until Augustus emerged the victor.

Being an empire does not necessitate civil wars in a society.

>>2706932
The main thing you'd need to do is manage to keep some form of civilian oversight over the army and keep the legions loyal to the institution of Rome, rather than whichever governor or general is paying them at the moment.

I'm not 100% sure how to go about that, but you'd probably do well looking at however the 19th century Europeans managed to keep a leash on their standing armies.

>>2706932
honestly the logistics of an empire that size would be considered impossible if we did not have Rome as a counterpoint. Their existence during the time period they existed in is pretty much unfathomable and so it is amazing that they even held it together as long as they did in the first place. Humans just didn't have the logistical capacity to manage something so large, and so it was managed poorly until it all crumbled on itself.

You'll note that all large empires throughout history feature civil wars, it's a natural aspect of empire when you unify separate and distinct cultures under one banner.

>>2706932
-enforce integration of other cultures into roman culture by force if necessary for long-term stability
-delegate power as necessary to avoid making emperorship too tasty of a reward for a coup
-establish an indisputable line of succession and harsh societal penalties for pretenders
-establish a system of companions a la Alexander the Great so that a ruler can trust a group of people to enact his will
-ensure that rulers will be strong and able by means of strict tutelage and parentage, heirs will be given no power or influence until they take the throne

there are so many more and maybe better ways to go about ensuring stability, but none of it will last because humans will be humans and humans are usually pieces of shit that will upend society if it suits their self-interest.

>>2707789
>Repress culture that is contradictory to Roman culture.
And eventually, ignite will to independence among the natives?