Despite the fact that we know virtually nothing about it except for it's occurence, and that Chandragupta gained vast territories in the east afterwards, including Arachosia, Gedrosia, and Paropamisadae, and in return, Seleucus recieved 500 elephants from him, while it might be an exaggeration, they were still crucial to defeating his rival Antigonus at Ipsus. So what if Seleucus somehow won a crushing victory despite the absolutely immense advantages Chandragupta has, and manages to not only avert the OTL loss of territory, but manages to acquire Punjab and parts of Sindh. How would such a victory impact both sides? Seleucus has more men and treasure, but he doesn't have the elephants that IOTL were so crucial in defeating Antigonus and his son Demetrius at the battle of Ipsus by preventing Demetrius from coming back to attack from the rear and aid his father, so could this lead to a surviving Antigonid state? As for the Maurya, do they pursue expansion elsewhere? Do they vassalize the Chola kingdoms and Tamil states in the south? Is Kalinga conquered earlier than OTL? What are the religious implications?
Seleucus wins the Seleucid-Maurya war of 305-303 BC?
- Thread starter SunKing105
- Start date
The war was short and left no hard feelings according to historians. Probably a status quo with the Seleucids confusing to control modern day Afghanistan.
We don't even have a reliable account of a single battle. It's most likely that whatever skirmishes and battles took place the real decisive factor was that Seleucus did not have a secure position and his most determined foes at the time were in the west. In exchange for territories he wasn't able to defend in the first place he got a resource that enabled him to triumph against those same foes.