WI and How: Can the Seleucids win the Roman-Syrian War?

The Roman-Syrian War was a military conflict that pitted the Roman Republic and allies against the Selecuid's under Antiochus III "the Great".

I've come across a bio that I've purchased for Kindle on the life of Antiochus the Great, and it made me wonder. The Syrian War, while wasn't the main thing that ultimately cause the Seleucid decline, did contribute to this. The War indemnity and war exhaustion as a result of the war helped galzanize the Parthians under Phraates I and Mithridates I to ultimately reduce the Seleucids to only their Levantine possessions.

So my question is, what if Antiochus III was successful in his war with Rome, and how could it be achieved, either through victory at Thermopylae or any of the naval engagements?

Best way is to aviid it altogether. Neigher side wanted the war. Failing that, have antiochus crush the romans at magnesia (easy) and the romans woukd likely accept antiochus merely give up claims to thrace (what they wanted initially).

I wonder if War could be avoided if Antiochus decided not to involve himself in the affairs of Greece, perhaps instead to focus on his internal affairs?

Noblesse Oblige said:

I wonder if War could be avoided if Antiochus decided not to involve himself in the affairs of Greece, perhaps instead to focus on his internal affairs?

Click to expand...

The war could have been avoided if Antiochus gave up his claims to Thrace. Rome didn't really want a war, but they didn't want Antiochus to have any influence on the other side of the Hellespont either. They were content with letting Antiochus do his thing in Anatolia as long as he respected their sphere of influence in Greece (which they claimed included Thrace). When Antiochus wasn't ready to abide by that, they jumped at the first justification for war.

So basically, have Antiochus be realistic for a moment and give up his claims to Thrace. It would be easy for him to just focus his attention on Pergamon, and if he agrees to drop all claims on Thrace and Makedon, then the Romans will most likely not intervene. Securing his grip on Anatolia actually puts him in a much stronger position for when and if he does come to blows with Rome.

slydessertfox said:

So basically, have Antiochus be realistic for a moment and give up his claims to Thrace. It would be easy for him to just focus his attention on Pergamon, and if he agrees to drop all claims on Thrace and Makedon, then the Romans will most likely not intervene. Securing his grip on Anatolia actually puts him in a much stronger position for when and if he does come to blows with Rome.

Click to expand...

If he did this we he have been able to successfully repulse the Parthians?

Noblesse Oblige said:

The Roman-Syrian War was a military conflict that pitted the Roman Republic and allies against the Selecuid's under Antiochus III "the Great".

I've come across a bio that I've purchased for Kindle on the life of Antiochus the Great, and it made me wonder. The Syrian War, while wasn't the main thing that ultimately cause the Seleucid decline, did contribute to this. The War indemnity and war exhaustion as a result of the war helped galzanize the Parthians under Phraates I and Mithridates I to ultimately reduce the Seleucids to only their Levantine possessions.

So my question is, what if Antiochus III was successful in his war with Rome, and how could it be achieved, either through victory at Thermopylae or any of the naval engagements?

Click to expand...

In doubt Antiochos III could have one. He could have given Rome a harder time if he had not started his campaign in such a poor way : landing in Greece only a small army of 5,000 men was a disaster that prevented the defection of several greek powers to his side.

Rome and her allies had naval superiority.

And roman legions were definitly superior to greek/hellenistic armies. And Rome had great generals.

Scorpius72 said:

If he did this we he have been able to successfully repulse the Parthians?

Click to expand...

Actually by the time of the Syrian War, Antochus III had already beaten the Parthians back into Satrapy status. It wasn't until his (debatable) grandson Alexander Balas, and the various internal troubles that followed (which may or may not have been a Seleucid War of Sucession) that allowed the Parthians to grow as strong and ultimately reduce the Seleucid Empire to just Syria. So it may just be the matter of keeping the Parthians as a Satrap.