Several Questions.

[Marcus Ulpius]

Extra Questions

5. Ptolemaioi and Seleukid States

c. And why is the Seleucid Empire so much referred to as Syria (or the inhabitants Syrians), it was much, much larger than Syria during the rule of Antiochos III Megas and before the Parthian invasion.

That was really all!

~Fluvius

It depends at what point of its history the kingdom was referred as Syria. Eventually the Seleucids ended up only with Syria. But even before that their core regions were Mesopotamia and Syria. Their rule in Asia Minor and Iran was never strong and consistent. Culturally they were closer to the more Hellenized population of Syria than to more "Eastern" population of Mesopotamia.

I'm by no means an expert, so I can be wrong, so any corrections are welcome :)

[Mulceber]

It depends at what point of its history the kingdom was referred as Syria. Eventually the Seleucids ended up only with Syria. But even before that their core regions were Mesopotamia and Syria. Their rule in Asia Minor and Iran was never strong and consistent. Culturally they were closer to the more Hellenized population of Syria than to more "Eastern" population of Mesopotamia.

I'm by no means an expert, so I can be wrong, so any corrections are welcome :)

Also, this is just conjecture, but since they didn't have consistant power in Turkey, that means that the only area in which they consistantly had access to the Mediterranean was in Syria/the Levant. Roman and Greek sources are where much of our information on this comes from, so if the only area where the Seleukids touched the mediterranean was the Levant, that's what they would be known for to Greco-Roman writers - as Syrians. So they could be known as such strictly because that's what the Romans and Greeks knew them for. I'm not saying the Greeks and Romans wouldn't know anything about the east (that's definitely not true), but the Levant would likely be the area of the Seleukid Empire that they were most familiar with, and thus how they identify the Seleukids, even though they controlled far more than that. Again, this is just conjecture and I could well be wrong. -M

[Fluvius Camillus]

Alright thank you for the feedback.

I was thinking about that too, but I remember the Seleucid Empire being referred to as Syria at the time of Antiochos III Megas before Magnesia..

Any shots at the other questions?

~Fluvius

[anubis88]

I've also read that Seleucia was the capital before 240 BC. I believe that the reason for this placement of the capital is for the AI to focus ont the west and the mediteranean more than on the east ( as in RL)

The seleucids were called syrians probably becouse their powerbase was in Syria, and that never changed throught history.

I also never heard that the romans actually concluded an alliance with the ptolemaioi. All i've ever read about was that the Ptolemys sent emisserys. I don't believe they concluded the alliance since the Ptolemaic kingdom helped carthage during the punic wars (at least one of them with money)

For the Arche thing. I asked that a long long time ago. IIRC the Arche in this context means something like the Mighty kingdom of Seleucia


hope anything helps

[Fluvius Camillus]

I also never heard that the romans actually concluded an alliance with the ptolemaioi. All i've ever read about was that the Ptolemys sent emisserys. I don't believe they concluded the alliance since the Ptolemaic kingdom helped carthage during the punic wars (at least one of them with money)

hope anything helps

Alright, now I've put the concerning biography in the first post (wrapped in spoiler tags).

~Fluvius

[Jebivjetar]

Originally Posted by anubis88 View Post
I also never heard that the romans actually concluded an alliance with the ptolemaioi. All i've ever read about was that the Ptolemys sent emisserys. I don't believe they concluded the alliance since the Ptolemaic kingdom helped carthage during the punic wars (at least one of them with money)


They did actually. Ptolemey XI Aulet (in time when Cesar was consul, 59BC) was proclaimed as "friend and ally" of Rome, and for that "honor" he make a promise to pay 6000 talents to Rome. (Ive found this in Plutarch book "Parallel lives")

Also, in time of first punic war, Ptolemey Philadelph declined to help Carthaginians with money (about 2000 talents) due to his friendly agreement with romans. (This ive found in one recent history book) -EDIT: in "History", 3. book named "Hellenism and Roman Republic", UTET Cultura, editor Enrico Cravetto, page 564 in croatian edition)

[anubis88]

I knew that the romans allied with the Ptolemaics in the late days of the republic, but i'm certain that i've read somewhere that the Ptolies DID help carthage with a payment during a punic war....

Sorry but i have no idea where i read this.
I hope someone alse can back me up on this interesting matter

[MeinPanzer]

The seleucids were called syrians probably becouse their powerbase was in Syria, and that never changed throught history.

Syria was only the centre of the empire after the shift from Seleucia in 240 BC, as stated. Before then, Seleucia (and, by extension, Mesopotamia) very much was the political and economic centre of the empire. Mesopotamia was Seleucus' home base, mainly because in his early struggles against Antigonus and the other Diadochoi he received a lot of support from Babylonia. It was only after the founding of the Syrian tetrapolis (Apamea, Laodicea, Antioch, Seleucia Pieria) that the focus of the empire shifted west.

As for the Syrians thing, this is really just a byproduct of the historical sources. Almost all of our sources relating to the Seleucid empire derive from later historical sources - Polybius, Livy, Appian, etc. These historians were writing during a time when the Seleucid empire's eastern holdings had been greatly reduced and the tetrapolis was the economic and political centre of the empire. Since much of our writing comes from Romans, and sustained Roman contact with the Seleucids didn't really begin until the late 3rd c. BC, the Seleucids are largely remembered as Syrians. For writers like Livy, the use of the term "Syrian" to refer to the Seleucids also had a pejorative sense.

[anubis88]

I just found where i read it.
It's in the chapter about carthaginian elephants in the book Hannibal by Gavin De Beer.

I will try to translate the part in question:
We know that Ptolemy II gave to Carthage a lot of financial help,. We can also assume that he sent them elephants, which was possible, since rome did not yet control the seas

[Jebivjetar]

I just found where i read it.
It's in the chapter about carthaginian elephants in the book Hannibal by Gavin De Beer.

I will try to translate the part in question:
We know that Ptolemy II gave to Carthage a lot of financial help,. We can also assume that he sent them elephants, which was possible, since rome did not yet control the seas

Well, it seems that Ptolies changed their attitude after the first punic war.

But one thing i do not understand: didn't Hannibal marched into Italy through Spain because he could not do that from the sea witch was controlled by Romans? I mean, in many books that is the main explanation why Hannibal crossed the Alps to reach Italy: sea was blocked by the Romans.

[everyone]

I think the victory conditions picture is outdated, in fact those of a few factions are outdated. such as Hayasdan. to view the real victory conditions, you should click on the '?' button on the top right of the scroll, then the advisor would appear and list the settlements you have to hold; and highlight those that you have yet to capture.

[Aemilius Paulus]

About the Syrian thing, in Russia, all sources refer to the Seleucid Empire as the Syrian Empire or the Syrians. What about Netherlands? What is it called there?

And yes, because the heartlands of Seleucia were in Syria, and because by the alter times, they have lost much of their holdings except Syria, the Seleukids are called Syrians, even when they were not. Most people in US never say "USSR" or "Soviet Union", but simply call that specific entity "Russia", despite the fact that Russia was simply the main "republic" of USSR, but of course, it was not the only. The area of USSR before the breakup was 22,402,200 km² (not counting the satellite states) and Russia's area is 17,075,400 km², much of which is wilderness.

[Fluvius Camillus]

About the Syrian thing, in Russia, all sources refer to the Seleucid Empire as the Syrian Empire or the Syrians. What about Netherlands? What is it called there?

And yes, because the heartlands of Seleucia were in Syria, and because by the alter times, they have lost much of their holdings except Syria, the Seleukids are called Syrians, even when they were not. Most people in US never say "USSR" or "Soviet Union", but simply call that specific entity "Russia", despite the fact that Russia was simply the main "republic" of USSR, but of course, it was not the only. The area of USSR before the breakup was 22,402,200 km² (not counting the satellite states) and Russia's area is 17,075,400 km², much of which is wilderness.

Alright that example of the USSR really made me see the light, I also still refer to England in modern wars, instead of the UK.

Well I had never heard about the Seleucid Empire until Rome Total War.

I played as Egypt, the mummy returns egyptians.... So I thougth I would face the Persian Empire Yes, bad knowledge back then. BUt to my surprise I fougth the Seleucids as my first enemy and usually referred to them as "The Suicide Empire".

Well in the Netherlands at basic school (the school were you go as kid) had really good history education, however the Seleucids were not mentioned. Until I played RTW I thougth that place was either filled by Alexanders Empire or the Persian Empire. Basic School did teach us about Greeks a bit and Romans a lot. On the school we also learned about the ancient stories of the time (Troy, Mozes etc.) At Middle School (sorry I cant keep the American names in my head, you know the one you go to from 12-18ish) we had history too, but it was far less general.

We learned the world history again, it was less interesting this time however, not the teacher's fault, but the books. In the 3rd Class we only had lessons from 1600-1991. In the 4th class we started all over again, alas, the Antiquity was over fast, so was the medieval period...

We mainly learned about the Early modern and modern period in 5th class. The dutch Republic (and Golden age, Holland FTW, mightiest country on earth that time) was the main subject, interesting, but I learned less about Antiquity.

To sum up I have never heard of the Seleucids or Syria in school, a short mention in a dutch history book though...

Glad I made a 93 page work on Rome's military myself, sad its dutch, else I could share.

Thanks for the feedback people, any shots on the other questions? Or are they more bug related?

~Fluvius

[Aemilius Paulus]

Glad I made a 93 page work on Rome's military myself, sad its dutch, else I could share.

Link please ?