Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Magnus Maximus, post: 4639834, member: 73473"]In 192 BCE, the ancient world was split into two spheres of influence: Roman and Seleucid. Rome in 192, had just come off their exhausting 17 war with Carthage, yet still found the will power to engage in greek affairs. Meanwhile, the Seleucids under the able rule of Antiochus III, had reclaimed the mantle of strongest successor kingdom after their victory over Egypt in 200 BCE, and the reconquest of Parthia and Bactria. Antiochus no doubt fancied himself becoming the next Alexander the Great, and made plans to expand into Greece and Thrace. I am no historian, but even a lay person could see that a conflict was brewing between the two rising superpowers that occupy roughly the same geographical area. I personally see a conflict between the Romans and Seleucids as inevitable, as both had interests that were conflicting and neither had the sense enough to back down. Here are some scenarios that I put forward: A Seleucid victory<ul> <li>At best I see the Seleucids fighting the Romans to a standstill in Asia Minor, and holding on to their Anatolian possessions. If the Seleucids played their cards right they could potentially defeat a Roman army in Anatolia as logistics would always render a Roman army in that area to be small in size. I don't see the Seleucids being able to hold onto Greece or Thrace simply due to the fact that they would not only have to win, but over win against the Romans. The Roman's at this point had a much larger manpower pool than the Seleucids did. At their height under Antiochus III the Seleucids were able to assemble an army of nearly 100,000 men. While impressive for a hellenistic army, it pales in comparison to the potential 750,000 man power pool that the Romans had during the 2nd Punic war. TLDR- A best case scenario for the Seleucids would be a status quo ante bellum.</li> </ul> A Roman Victory<ul> <li>Not really speculation as this is what occurred in real life. Rome defeated a Seleucid army at Thermopylae, and drove the Seleucids out of Greece and Thrace. Rome along with it's allies landed an army in Asia Minor and won an impressive victory at the battle of Magnesia against a numerically superior force. The battle was closely contested and could have been won by the Seleucids, had Antiochus's calvary swung behind the Roman center instead of pursuing the shattered Roman right flank. Modern estimates for the battle of Magnesia are 5,000 Roman dead and 10,000 Seleucid dead; the battle was a disaster for the Seleucids but not an all out massacre.</li> </ul>As far as battlefield tactics goes, the Romans had it in the bag. Rome had experience with dealing with the Macedonian style phalanx as far back as the 270's BCE with Pyrrhus, and had recently defeated Philip V's army only a few years prior to war with the Seleucids. While on the flip side, the Seleucids has zero experience in dealing with a Roman style army. In addition, while both states had a competent officer class, the Romans by virtue of having their incompetent leadership massacred repeatedly by Hannibal during the 2nd Punic war, probably had more experienced and merit based officers in their ranks by 192 BCE. Again, just an interesting scenario that I put together of what could have occurred, and ultimately what did occur. Now some coins! Basileus Antiochus III Megas of the Seleucid Empire[ATTACH=full]1146653[/ATTACH] Syria, Antiochus III; 223-187 BC. Antioch on the Orontes, Series I, c. 223-211/10 BC, Tetradrachm, 16.96g. SC-1042.1; Newell WSM-1051. Obv: Diademed head of Antiochus III r., with youthful features, no sideburn, hair in bangs over forehead, dotted border. Rx: ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ on r., ΑΝΤΙΟΧΟΥ on l., Apollo, slight drapery on r. thigh, seated l. on omphalos, testing arrow and resting l. hand on grounded bow with grip marked by row of pellets; control marks in outer l. field.. EF / VFI absolutely love the style on this tetradrachm. Definitely one of my favorite coins to date![ATTACH=full]1146663[/ATTACH] VS The Roman Republic[ATTACH=full]1146657[/ATTACH] ANONYMOUS Denarius.After 211 BC. Rome mint.Obv/ Helmeted head of Roma right, wearing single drop earring and pearl necklace; X (mark of value) to left.Rev/ The Dioscuri on horseback riding right, each holding couched spear, and wearing chlamys, cuirass, and a pileus surmounted by star; ROMA in relief in linear frame in exergue. Cat: Crawford 53/2; Sydenham 311; RBW 193Silver (Ar) 3,8g - 21mm.Nice patina.My first Roman Republic denarius, and a beautiful one at that. I wouldn't mind getting a few coins of the later Republic when the wheels really started falling off the bus. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie11" alt=":rolleyes:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[ATTACH=full]1146664[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches