What If Antiochus IV Epiphanes Refuses to Turn Back?

In 168 BC in OTL, Antiochus IV of the Seleucid Empire marched down the Levantine coast and was preparing to invade Egypt with a great host. He likely would have succeeded, had the Romans not sent an ambassador named Gaius Popillius Laenas to turn him aside. Laenas met Antiochus near the Nile delta and drew a line around him in the sand; if Antiochus did not decide to turn back before stepping outside the circle, he would face Rome's wrath.

In OTL Antiochus considered for a few moments (or maybe minutes), before deciding to turn back, leaving Egypt to the Ptolemies. Now let's say, with a POD of a hangover or bellyache or diarrhea, Antiochus is in a bad mood, and decides to say no (or perhaps even executes Laenas on the spot); he invades and subdues most of Egypt before the Romans can arrive.

Now, can he keep Egypt under control under a governor, or will he install a puppet (or even false) Ptolemy to rule it? In how strong of a position are the Romans, and can they really threaten his holdings in Asia Minor, Cilicia, Syria, and Judea?

If Antiochus does this then he will have the wealth of Egypt to lean on, and butterflies flurry away his death due to disease four years later. Since his rule was the last strong one of the Seleucid Empire, he can spread his ideals and strength to his son (maybe), who was an infant at his father's death IOTL; with this POD Antiochus can live very long (he is from a long-lived family), and his son will be an energetic young man when he assumes the throne.

Another interesting situation of note is the continued persecution of Jews. Antiochus tried to Hellenize Judaism, associating Yahweh with Zeus and then both with himself (as he was considered a god by most of his subjects' religions); of course this backfired, but do you think that, with more time and force, the majority of Judaism will be hellenized, or most Jews will leave Judea for freer places such as Rome and Greece?
 
Before continuing, I'd wager that the Seleucid Empire would've continued to prosper (at least better than OTL) had Antiochus III won at Magnesia...
 
The Seleucids would be lucky if the Romans keep them around as the rulers of a rump Syrian state, one amongst many of Rome's allies in the east. I don't see Antiochus doing well in a war with Rome.
 

Razgriz 2K9

Banned
The Seleucids would be lucky if the Romans keep them around as the rulers of a rump Syrian state, one amongst many of Rome's allies in the east. I don't see Antiochus doing well in a war with Rome.

Agreed, at this point it's no secret that the Roman Legionnaire is superior in any and every aspect than the Greek Hoplite, and the Seleucids using antiquated Alexandrian tactics.
 
Executing the ambassador on the spot would only ensure Rome did something about it. People seem to forget though that Rome was very very hesitant about going to war with his father and doesn't have any foothold in Asia to begin with. The Pergamese might still be advocating for war, but this time they might be less vocal: unlike with Antiochus III's deal with Phillip V, this time the Pergamese don't really have any direct threat posed to them by the Seleucids.

If Antiochus annexes Egypt, then Rome would definitely come. However, if he essentially supports another Ptolemy as a claimant to the throne, I'm not sure the Romans would definitely intervene.

Also, Antiochus seemed to be keen on reforming his army in a more Roman fashion (I believe he kept a unit of essentially copy cat Roman legionaries and was intending to do more IIRC). Don't forget also that Antiochus III only lost at Magnesia because of his own blunders not because of the legion's inherent superiority over the phalanx. The Seleucid army was a lot more than just the phalanx, and it had a lot of flexible non-phlananx infantry components as well as a strong crack cavalry force. It could very well beat the Roman army in a pitched battle.

The problem is winning a war, but the Romans might not feel the need or reason to fight such a war with a nation that poses little to no threat to them at this point, unlike say Carthage did or Phillip V.
 
Top