The Seleucid Empire

[frankq]

here is a peice of what I wrote...

IYet the Maccabees were smart not to take control of the main citadel in Jerusalem which was

Edited January 21, 2006 by frankq

[Neos Dionysos]

(Someday I'm gonna figure out how all these fonts and snippets work...and how to properly edit down previous quotes in proper block form)

 

LoL... you'll get it.

 

They actually couldnt take control of it, it remained pretty much impregnable, and didnt go over to Judean hands until the Seleucids pulled out. I'm not sure what you mean about them not allying with hostiles. When Judas Maccabee finally did play his hand at diplomacy and sent a delegation to Rome, it pushed alarm buttons in Antioch. Of course this was later.

 

Yes and my point that they did not take it, meant to the Seleukids the situation was not 'completely' out of thier control at least from their point of view. Also, because the rebels had not tried to make relations with other foriegn powers, (for the first couple of years anyway), the rebellion was not seen as a major issue, more like a minor conflict, however once Rome became involved, then suddenly Seleukia realized the truth of the situation and saw they had to act deciviely which is why at this time you see a conserted effort to crush the revolt.

[Ursus]

Interesting, topic, Neos. Thank you.

 

I don't know as much as about the Seleucids as I do about Ptolemaic Egypt. But Michael Grant paints an interesting portrait of it in one of his books.

 

There was a short thread a while ago touching on the Seleucids. If I can find it I am merging it with this one into one meta-discussion.

 

Keep up the interesting discussion.

 

edit: done. Another topic on the Selucids has been merged with this one.

[Neos Dionysos]

Well, let's expand on this. Personally, I'd love to hear everyone's opinions on the story of Antiochos I Soter and Stratonike.

 

Also, perhaps then Ursus, you can help shed light on what started the Syrian Wars with Seleukia and Ptolemaic Egypt. There were five, and this constant fighting, really drained the empires, (well mainly the Seleukids who had less to muster against the East or in Asia Minor). I always thought it interesting that Seleukos and Ptolemy, who were close friends, and who fought together and the longest than ANY of the other successors, would end up having each of thier lines exhaust themselves waging war over Syria, Judea, Palastine/Phonecia.

[Ursus]

I'm not the best person to ask about military history, though. :-/

 

But I agree with you it's an interesting slice of history.

[Neos Dionysos]

I'm not the best person to ask about military history, though. :-/

 

But I agree with you it's an interesting slice of history.

 

 

Alright then, I'll try and dig up what I can and if you would not mind, supplment what I come up with, with the Ptolemaic side of matters if possible. Thanks.

[Pimpinus]

Interesting sidenote: Philip the V of Macedon adempted to capture Ptolemy the V's empire with the help of Antiochus. I dont know how far Antiochus and Philip went through with this plan but they definitely did not capyure the Ptolemic Empire. Could this possibly have iinfluenced the Syrian Wars?

[Primus Pilus]

Interesting sidenote: Philip the V of Macedon adempted to capture Ptolemy the V's empire with the help of Antiochus. I dont know how far Antiochus and Philip went through with this plan but they definitely did not capyure the Ptolemic Empire. Could this possibly have iinfluenced the Syrian Wars?

 

Absolutely the alliance against Ptolemaic Egypt played a part in influencing Rome. One of the factors in the negotiations for peace prior to the Syrian war was that Antiochus was required to return conquests of Egyptian territory to the Ptolemies. While this arrangment was never quite settled (and the invasions of Antiochus against Greek cities rendered negotiation pointless), it shows that the Romans were very much embroiled in all the international politics of the Alexandrian successor kingdoms.

[Neos Dionysos]

Interesting sidenote: Philip the V of Macedon adempted to capture Ptolemy the V's empire with the help of Antiochus. I dont know how far Antiochus and Philip went through with this plan but they definitely did not capyure the Ptolemic Empire. Could this possibly have iinfluenced the Syrian Wars?

 

 

No, it was a by product. The Syrian Wars, (of which I think were 4 or 5), started with Ptolemy II and Antiochos I back in the very early part of the 3rd Century bc.

 

That is a good point to note, and they did not get very far at all, mainly due to Philip's involvement and alliance with Carthage against Rome, which, brought on Rome's wrath and culminated in Philip's kingdom losing to Rome and also then drawing in Antiochos III into a conflict with Rome soon after.

[Segestan]

In the year 306 BC the Diadochi was the popular accepted Monarchy in Alexander

[Kosmo]

Hi all!

I think that the roman and greek bias against hellenistic kings it's still alive in public opinion.

Greek culture was adopted far beyond the limits of the greek colonisation and of the macedonian conquests. Even western civiliations like ertuscan and Carthage were heavy influenced by it.

Despite often struggels for power it must be noted that both Seleucid and Ptolemeic dinasties survived and no other dinasty toppled them like it happened so often in the Roman Empire. The profesional armies used by them were much better then the persian levies and later Rome will follow the same path.

Political unrest was a normal problem in kingdoms created by a thin foreign elite, with no traditional borders or political institutions.

I don't see why ethnic diversity was considered a problem of the Seleucid Kingdom when all Middle East empires had a similar issue.

The hellenistic world did not collapsed, it was defeated and united by Rome.

[Segestan]

<<<<<don't see why ethnic diversity was considered a problem of the Seleucid Kingdom when all Middle East empires had a similar issue.>>>> Pontus and Armenia had Persian Satraps , not Macedonian. It wasn't hard for the Eastern princes to rule with only a flavor of Hellenism. Seleucas built his Capital at Antioch , named after his father, eveb though this site was far west of his territories; he always felt allienated aways from Hellenism in the eastern provinces. The Seleucas' Empire had it's cities named after his father, mother , and himself and his two wife's. His murder , by Keraunos, the son of Lysimachus; allowed Ptolemy to take advantage of chaos and seige his provinces of Cole-syria. It took his son Antiochus Ten years to regain them. The single biggest problem the diadochi had; no agreed plan of rule. And in Macedonia ; Antigonus was attempting to become the New Hellenistic Monarch. In fighting in the most powerful families in the world let the lesser cultures destroy Hellenism.

 

 

regards,

[Neos Dionysos]

His murder , by Keraunos, the son of Lysimachus; allowed Ptolemy to take advantage of chaos and seige his provinces of Cole-syria. It took his son Antiochus Ten years to regain them. The single biggest problem the diadochi had; no agreed plan of rule. And in Macedonia ; Antigonus was attempting to become the New Hellenistic Monarch. In fighting in the most powerful families in the world let the lesser cultures destroy Hellenism.

 

regards,

 

It was the first-born son of Ptolemy. He had been dis-inheireted because Ptolemy had taken a liking to his new wife Berekine over that of Keranus' mother Eurydike.

 

One should wonder then, what was Ptolemy's reaction to this since Seleukos was one of Ptolemy's oldest and closest friends.

[Segestan]

<<<<It was the first-born son of Ptolemy. He had been dis-inheireted because Ptolemy had taken a liking to his new wife Berekine over that of Keranus' mother Eurydike.

>>>> Seleucas was on his way back to Macedonia ; after having givee up all his Asiatic possessions from the Hellispont to the Indus to his son Antiochus , and he meant to spend the rest the last of his years in the home of his fathers, Macedonia; but as he was entering that Kingdom , he was murdered by Keraunos , whom he had brought with him in his train. The blood thirsty murderer was left with a throne. He then married the queen , his step sister . But it was only so that he could murder her children by Lysimachus, the only dangerous claimants to the Thracian throne. The wretched queen then fled to Samothrace, and then to Egypt, where she ended her quilty and chequered career as queen of her full brother Ptolemy II(Philadelphus)and was deified during her life!.

<<<One should wonder then, what was Ptolemy's reaction to this since Seleukos was one of Ptolemy's oldest and closest friends.>>>> like Alexander and lysimachus; Seleucas and Ptolemy had a common bond only in being raised with the ideas of their master Aristotle. There was no friendship , only a duty to self and power. The whole affair of the Diadochi was rooted in establishing , for those who were the rich and powerful merchants and ruling class of the ancient world, only a means to an end , of securing Hellenism , thus securing law and order. The players in this NWO , were men such as Ptolemy and Seleucas , they were of course only chess pieces to that end.

 

regards,

[Neos Dionysos]

I question that only because Seleukos, (when he had no where else to go), went to the court of Ptolemy and fought with him and for him, (and if we are to beleive sources, Ptolemy consulted him on his war plans), and he even gave Seleukos forces to retake his kingdom. After Antigonos was gone Seleukos campaigned everywhere to retake Alexander's empire except Egypt. I think thier bond was more than simple, oppurtunity.