AHC: Have the Selcuid empire lose everything east of the zargos but...

By 1 ad they control all of Anatolia, Mesopotamia, the ptolomeic empire, Syria, Palestine, Greece, Macedonia, and the rest of the Balkans. Basically it becomes an early Byzantine empire centered at Antioch or Alexander's empire west of the zargos. It has to be as hellenized and centralized as possible. So what has to happen for this empire to happen?
 
By 1 ad they control all of Anatolia, Mesopotamia, the ptolomeic empire, Syria, Palestine, Greece, Macedonia, and the rest of the Balkans. Basically it becomes an early Byzantine empire centered at Antioch or Alexander's empire west of the zargos. It has to be as hellenized and centralized as possible. So what has to happen for this empire to happen?

I'm not really sure, but I'd love to see this. Maybe a Seleucid victory at Magnesia? The main problem would be making them weak enough to lose their eastern dominions, but still strong enough to keep Syria and Mesopotamia and to expand further to the west.
 
I'm not really sure, but I'd love to see this. Maybe a Seleucid victory at Magnesia? The main problem would be making them weak enough to lose their eastern dominions, but still strong enough to keep Syria and Mesopotamia and to expand further to the west.
Maybe they abandon there eastern domains it was too rebellious. Also most of the Greeks settled in the Selcuid empire were settled west of the zargos right?
 
I don't think this is that difficult at all. Actually the historical configuration of the empire is more likely.

Both the Seleucids and the Ptolemids recruited heavily from Macedon and Greek and kept their hand in Greek affairs. The Seleucids had nothing as secure and wealthy a colony as Egypt and were therefore drawn more to the western part of their dominions. Its no accident that it was the Seleucids and not the Ptolemids who wound up confronting Rome in the Aegean.

The POD could be something as simple as Seleucus I gaining control of Macedon, and his successors are based in Macedon but retain many of the eastern territories. Over time, they would sacrifice their easternmost territories to concentrate on Macedon, the Aegean, and the Western Med in general.

Antiochus III winning and Magnesia and conquering Greece subsequently, or Antiochus IV conquering Egypt, defeating Rome, and rebuilding the empire from Syria and Egypt could also do it. The Seleucids would be so involved in fending off Rome that they wouldn't bother contesting the Parthian advance.
 
I don't think this is that difficult at all. Actually the historical configuration of the empire is more likely.

Both the Seleucids and the Ptolemids recruited heavily from Macedon and Greek and kept their hand in Greek affairs. The Seleucids had nothing as secure and wealthy a colony as Egypt and were therefore drawn more to the western part of their dominions. Its no accident that it was the Seleucids and not the Ptolemids who wound up confronting Rome in the Aegean.

The POD could be something as simple as Seleucus I gaining control of Macedon, and his successors are based in Macedon but retain many of the eastern territories. Over time, they would sacrifice their easternmost territories to concentrate on Macedon, the Aegean, and the Western Med in general.

Antiochus III winning and Magnesia and conquering Greece subsequently, or Antiochus IV conquering Egypt, defeating Rome, and rebuilding the empire from Syria and Egypt could also do it. The Seleucids would be so involved in fending off Rome that they wouldn't bother contesting the Parthian advance.
What about Mesopotamia?
 
Top