AHC: Surviving Lysimachid dynasty

At its height, the Kingdom of Lysimachus consisted of Thrace and the Anatolian territories of Bithynia, Paphlagonia, Pontus, Lydia, Ionia, Phrygia, Caria, Pisidia and Lycia. Its capital was Lysimachia on what is now the Gallipoli peninsula.

OTL, Seleucus killed Lysimachus and conquered his kingdom in 281 BC at the Battle of Corupedium. Would it be possible for a Lysimachid Kingdom to survive at least until the Romans come along? How would a surviving Lysimachid Kingdom affect the politics of Macedon and Greece? Would Pontus, Galatia or Pergamum emerge?
 
A surviving lysimachus dynasty would be easy. We can start with not having him kill his popular son causing his position to weaken and popularity to wane. This might also temporarily butterfly the main reasons that led to his war with Seleucus.

Macedonia would likely end up in the hands of the lysimachids what with all the chaos and the power vacuum going on there.
 
A surviving lysimachus dynasty would be easy. We can start with not having him kill his popular son causing his position to weaken and popularity to wane. This might also temporarily butterfly the main reasons that led to his war with Seleucus.

Macedonia would likely end up in the hands of the lysimachids what with all the chaos and the power vacuum going on there.

An earlier death for Amastris might solve that problem, seeing as how it was her death that caused Lysimachus to execute his sons.

With the Lysimachids allied to the Ptolemies through marriage against the Seleucids, how would that affect the flow of Hellenic settlers to Syria? The successors tended to rely mainly on Greek and Macedonian settlers for their armies. I think the Seleucids would turn more to the native groups they ruled - Syrians, Babylonians, Medes, Arabs, Persians, Bactrians - for cultural, administrative and military support, the way the Ptolemies did around and after Raphia.
 
With the Lysimachids allied to the Ptolemies through marriage against the Seleucids, how would that affect the flow of Hellenic settlers to Syria? The successors tended to rely mainly on Greek and Macedonian settlers for their armies. I think the Seleucids would turn more to the native groups they ruled - Syrians, Babylonians, Medes, Arabs, Persians, Bactrians - for cultural, administrative and military support, the way the Ptolemies did around and after Raphia.

Well the Seleucids already relied heavily on the natives who also seemed to have a nice stake in the empire. So I can definitely see this.
 
Last edited:
There was one.

Lysimachos and Arsinoe had three sons, two of whom were killed by Ptolemy Keraunos after he took power in Thrace. The eldest son, another Ptolemy, didn't trust his uncle and fled to the Egyptian kingdom of his other uncle, Ptolemy II. He was later set up in a small Ptolemaic client kingdom at Telmessus on the Anatolian coast.

Below is a small clip from the Regnal Chronologies website listing, inter alia, the Lysimachid rulers:


TELMESSUS (Fethiye) A port in far eastern Caria, at the edge of ancient Lycia - it is about 55 miles (88 km.) east-northeast of the city of Rhodes, across the waters adjacent to the far southwestern Turkish coast that it lies on. In ancient times there was a major school divination here - it's best-known son, Aristander, had a powerful influence over Alexander the Great.
  • To Persia.........................................546-480
  • Within the Delian League..........................480-404
  • Probably to Persia, possibly autonomous...........404-335
  • To Macedon........................................335-305
  • To the Kingdom of Antigonos.......................305-301
  • To Egypt..........................................301-259
  • LYSIMACHID
  • Ptolemy I.........................................259-240
  • Lysimachus II.....................................fl. 220
  • Ptolemy II........................................fl. 189
 
Top