WI: Antigonus wins at Ipsus (301 BCE)

IOTL, during the Wars Of The Diadochi, there was a pitched battle between Antigonus I Monophthalmus on one side, and a coalition of Seleucus I Nicator, Cassander of Macedon, and Lysimachus of Thrace on the other side.
Here's a map of the near east, previous to the Battle Of Ipsus:
Diadoch.png

Antigonus could not resist the opportunity to defeat all of his three biggest enemies in one battle, while the coalition could not resist the opportunity to defeat their biggest enemy in one battle.
Eventually, the latter scenario would become true, and Antigonus was killed in the middle of the battle by a javelin. Later, his realm in Anatolia and Syria would be partitioned between the three victorious diadochi.
But what if Antigonus had won the battle?
How much of his realm would he be able to keep? Would he be able to attain further conquests?
 
Much depends on if he can kill any of his own rivals. And since the Successors rarely led from the rear, there's a good chance at least one will die in the fighting. If this happens, Antigonos has a solid chance.

The problem though, is that Ipsos is almost too late. By this point Seleukos is dominant in the East and Antigonos' position has been doing nothing but steasily eroding for a while. Ipsos feels a bit like a concession to Antigonos' desperation - he wasn't able to deal with his foes piecemeal and he was never able to prevent a coalition from developing against him every time he tried to consolidate.

Even if he won, his position was already rocky. Ptolemaios will always be a thorn in his side. The Eastern Satraps are replaced with Seleukos' people. Kassandros and Lysimakhos are probably in the two weakest positions, but without their deaths in battle they're still going to have power bases of their own and more manpower to call upon.
 
Much depends on if he can kill any of his own rivals. And since the Successors rarely led from the rear, there's a good chance at least one will die in the fighting. If this happens, Antigonos has a solid chance.

The problem though, is that Ipsos is almost too late. By this point Seleukos is dominant in the East and Antigonos' position has been doing nothing but steasily eroding for a while. Ipsos feels a bit like a concession to Antigonos' desperation - he wasn't able to deal with his foes piecemeal and he was never able to prevent a coalition from developing against him every time he tried to consolidate.

Even if he won, his position was already rocky. Ptolemaios will always be a thorn in his side. The Eastern Satraps are replaced with Seleukos' people. Kassandros and Lysimakhos are probably in the two weakest positions, but without their deaths in battle they're still going to have power bases of their own and more manpower to call upon.
So... it all depends on whom he can kill in the battle?
I'll make a prediction:
If he kills Cassander, he most probably gets Macedon, or at least Greece.
If he kills Lysimachus, he most probably gets Thrace.
If he kills Seleucus, he won't be able to conquer Persia, but he can still weaken the seleucids temporarily. Will he be able to reconquer Syria from them?
Also, how much of a thorn on his side was ptolemaic Egypt? Was it enough to pose a massive threat or just a nuisance?
 
I think that no matter what happens he'll temporarily need to press East. Now he has lieutenants, or even his son, whom he could send west to mop of Kassandros and Lysimakhos, but I think he will need to mop of the Seleukids first before anything else - especially if the battle doesn't see them decisively defeated. Otherwise he risks leaving the eastern flank entirely undefended and getting bogged down in Greece.
 
Top