Rise and Fall of the Seleucid Empire (Who were the Seleucids?) 

Lmao I chuckled out loud at this kne

If only they had fought others instead of each other...

@@robertsanders7060 it was Alexander's biggest mistake to not secure a succession line.

@@Lycurgus1982 well he almost certainly did remember much of what we know about the past has gone trough several layers of propaganda why would anyone what to tell the truth about alexanders succession and also seleukes is under rated he could have fixed every thing why would you think a 30 year old alexander could have done better than this man? He was easly just as capable

@@arianrezaie4729 there was a fair amount of resentment in the army toward Alexander and his exploits in Persia, but most of his kinsmen loved him. For all of Alexander's qualities, he had an equal amount of personal conflicts as well. Choosing to change from first amongst equals to absolute monarch was deeply troubling to the Macedonian elite and as a result, he was blindsided before he could cement his Dynasty. I'm not sure where your coming from making comparisons to Seleukos. These two men were different in many ways.

@@vadergamerboss6660 Achaemenids, Parthians and Sassanids All ruled from Babylon/Seleucia/Ctesiphon, which is the same general location.

Vadergamerboss 66 Apamea was a Persian noblewoman. Antiochus I was 50% Persian

LOL!

>TheSeleucidsWereNotPersianBecauseTheirCapitalWasNotInPersiaGuy deleted his comments out of embarrassment jej

@@cyrusthegreatofpersiairan7569 not really only occasionally

It makes Caesar's swift conquest of them all the more impressive, in my books. People often underestimate them, forgetting how much of a genius Caesar was in comparison to literally everyone.

Celt of Canaan Esurix Gauls were in the grand armee of Antiochus III and fought in Afghanistan and Pakistan

@@ChevyChase301 Source? Anyways I wonder how far the gauls would have go if Seleucos didn't stop them. Maybe they would have India or even China!

@@MrSafior the Gauls were Seleucid auxiliaries and are recorded in Iran in addition to Persian and cretan. The Seleucid army did not garrison any regions and did not take many loses in Antiochus Anabasis. Logically they would have accompanied anitiochus into Bactria and India but it is not recorded. it is likely Antiochus army was at full strength when entering parapomisadea because the Indian ruler submitted without a fight. The Gauls were definitely not strong enough to mutiny during the expedition as it is recorded at 100,000+ men in the army of mostly greeks

@@ChevyChase301 Do you have source or link to to this record ?

i know you from some other video...

Can't deny that truth. As a pure and highly credible Roman scholar called Dovahaty says "The absolute shit flinging mess that was Greek politics at the time"

a fellow fan of dova i ser here

Yeah, same as Mexico...

Antioc Alexandria Pela. United. In Rome.

Aynen

Yunan mı bunlar?yoksa makedon mu

@@olumluhayatbugunvarsinyari1326 bence Makedon

The DORUK evet makedonmuş yunan değil

The DORUK yunan etkisi var diye yunan diyorlar ama yunan kökenli değil kesinlikle

Check out The Storm Before The Storm by Michael Duncan.

Or how Rome is basically taught as a self made empire and not a force that mostly mopped up some older empires that had fallen.

@@Hashishin13 i think the idea is that while they did take a lot from other cultures, namely Greece, Rome's unified, systematic and bureaucratic organizational approach allowed for an almost industrial uniformity and standard of quality when it came to things like their military and engineering feats. While the engineering feats of the Romans, to my knowledge, don't really stack up to ancient works like the great Pyramid, the expansive Roman networks of roads and aqueducts show what their more unified, industrious approach was able to achieve when compared to the fractured nature of the Greek city-states.

@@Hashishin13 lol rome was successful because they had a very efficient slave system. The roman empire was built on the backs of gallic, greek, german, iberian and african slaves. Granted, most other civilizations also used slaves but the romans did so on an industrial scale.

Well, it fell apart pretty fast

@Zen Tao Demetrius Poliorcetes, not because of his tactics or victories (sometimes he was succesful sometimes he was not) but I admire him for his conduct with his enemies as well as for his restless ambitions. He was constantly at war with all kings (except Agathocles) and was constantly campaigning with no rest. For that, he is my favourite man in history

This was the famous attack against Peithon's army from the east. It was less than three to one odds. What Seleukos did against Antgonus in the west is even more impressive and took some serious stones.

@@Lycurgus1982 You are confusing the events, Peithon son of Crateuas (executed 315 BC) and Peithon son of Agenor (killed in action 312 BC) were both dead by the time of Babylonian wars. (another Peithon son of Sosicles died circa 328 BC). I suppose by "famous attack against Peithon" you mean coalition of satraps from the Upper Satrapies (Peucestas, Sibyrtius, Eudamus the Greek and others) against Peithon son of Crateuas and his brother Eudamus but that was before before 318 BC and Seleucus took no part in it, only later gave refuge to Peithon when he was defeated.

I checked the coalition from Upper satrapies in Anson 2014 just now. It consisted of: Peucestas, the satrap of Persis, Tlepolemus, the satrap of Carmania, Sibyrtius, satrap of Arachosia, Androbazus, general for Oxyartes, Stasander, the satrap of Areia and Drangiana, Eudamus from India and Amphimachus, the satrap of Mesopotamia.

@Il Bugiardo dell'Umbria If you have no experience with the period nor ancient historians, then it's probably best to start with reading popular history books. There is only one book which deals with the whole period of Diadochi wars, it's "Dividing the spoils", and since it covers a large span of time: it sucks as it can be expected. I have read it 2 years ago and I was so dissapointed, it ommits like 90% of history and gives you only the most basic info. It's not even well written. I highly discoruage reading it. However there is a book "Ghost on the Throne" by James Romm that covers period 323-316/315 BC (W. Heckel/E. Anson dating) + the Athenian politics 324-318 BC + little throwback to the times of Alexander campaigns. Since it covers smaller part of history: it is quite detailed. James Romm is a fantastic writer. Writing style 10/10, historical content 8/10. You will get a great introduction to main events, you will get very familiar with generals and some higher ranking officers. But obviously it ommits smaller events and less important officers. But after this book you can confidently start reading ancient sources and have a clear idea what is going on. The rest of the books I know are not popular history, they are ment to be read when you have a good idea of the period and you are familair with ancient sources. You can also read ancient sources directly. Wars of Diadochi has few sources so there is not that much to read. The core is diodorus Siculus books:18,19 and 20 (18th book is almost entirely dedicated to Diadochi, 19th less diadochi, 20th much less diadochi). Plutarch is the biggest secondary source, rest is scattered over multiple smaller sources (some attractive, like surviving fragments of Arrian:Successors or Memnon of Heracleia; some unattractive: like Strabo or Pausanias). These ancient historians are public domain, so you can read it online, absolutely for free. That's my favourite period of history, if you chose to read ancient sources, I can guide you through it (saying what to read), if you want you can add me on discord: Alcetas#6256

Imagine the state revived for three years instead of 3 days

Yeah, that was unexpected and drew some laughs. The "Seleucid Zombie State" label was a nice touch, too.

Every remotely ambitious general from the second century BC onwards: "I'm gonna do a pro-gamer move"

@ Peter Santos .....

*The disembodied voice of Diocletian crying out from beyond time and space*

@@asfm2 Now D was the size of a top tier Diadocchus

Proceeds to have civil war every month.

May i ask why you prefer Mr Selecus Nikator over the other the other successors ?

I liked Ptolemaic Egypt, one of my favorites personally.

@@kaiza9184 I personally like antiochus iv. He not only put a puppet on Ptolemaic throne but was also smart enough to not fight the Romans. By doing this he baught the empire at least another 100 years but sadly he was failed by his successors.

No it wasb't stop projackulating

I m son in law of selucus nicator

That is a very interesting region of Turkey. I am am glad you like the video :)

U know Chandragupta

You're Persianised. As usual, Persian influence will never escape you. Never.

@@saeedvazirian you make it sound like it is a bad thing.

@@saeedvazirian Persian influence is insignificant compared to Greek, Latin, Hindu and Mandarin.

All of them late game and you start with half your empire made of first tier cities two which can only train peasants. The parthians and Armenians will come at you in the east with horse archers perfectly suited to pick a part your pike men, Greek cities and Pontus in the west, and Egypt in the south. Lose Antioch and it's all but game over. Little wonder the AI can't handle it. Survive though and you might be one of the few factions that can take post reform Romans in a straight fight.

helenic lie and bloff history.selusid was not cataphract.they are use helenic war style.but parthians was catapharact cavalry(original knight)and kick ass selucids .

I suggest you read this books parhtian and sasanids rom enemis by peter vilcox.and sasanian elite cavalry by kaveh farrokh

@Nomad, O Cavaleiro you are wrong catapharact was mean havy cavalry armor.and Persian was first people in world use them

@@masoudkhosravi2822 you do know they are talking about a video game called Rome: Total War (RTW), right?

A for effort

Heard a story where an Indian elephant nabbed an enemy king before dumping him at the feet of his own army. The enemy king was then beheaded.

TheLoyalOfficer Definitely the worst borders of the Diadochi

DingoBling check out empire of Antigonus II. Literally just a bunch of coasts and islands

@@ChevyChase301 Well sure, he sucked too.

TheLoyalOfficer Demetrius after Ipsus only had Boetia, Peloponnesus, Cyclades, Ionia, Cyprus and Tyre literally the most disgusting thing.

@@ChevyChase301 LOL, yes, I hear ya. I'm not saying you're wrong. My comment was about the Seleucid Empire, though.

His defeat obliterated the last Seleukid army. It was this that marks his reign as a tragic failure. Up until then, Syria was able to produce on its own an army of around 60,000 men, but his defeat was so catastrophic that the Syrian population was stunted for a few generations. It was only until Philip I that Syria had a few years to breathe before Tigranes invaded in 75/74

*Death: Yes.

More like eternal relax

Isn't there an Bollywood show on this?

@@angusyang5917 no idea, Bollywood is dead BTW!

@@DurgeshYadav-ip1zr Really? Aww :( I liked some of their movies, mostly of their special effects 😂 comedy gold!

@@aromanlegionnair5096 there are a lot of good Bollywood movies but lately they just haven't been up to the mark.

@@aromanlegionnair5096 u can watch bajirao mastani

He couldn't have been that disappointed when they asked him on his deathbed who the empire should go to he said "the strongest"

Even after the Diadochi they could have said: « Look, we are Greek Kings controlling ancient lands, why we don’t work together and accomplish Alexander s’invasion programs? »

@@12345adambomb Assuming that story is true, the context is missing. What did Alexander mean by that? How would such a person be selected?

@@tuele4302 its probably a mistranslation/ legend to enforce the legitimacy of the successors. What Alexander actually said was "Hoti to kratisto" so some people think they just misheard him and he was trying to say the empire goes to Cassander his lifelong friend and general. But it's way to good of a legend to not repeat.

@@tuele4302 alternatively if he really did mean to say "to the strongest" he was probably just bitter he didn't get to rule over his great empire. An "if I can't have it no one can" situation.

i own a greco turkish friendship discord server if you want to join send me your account

There's a biography of Antiochus III that has a lot of good info in it and covers a lot of the events of this video.

Glad you liked it Luis :D

@@EpimetheusHistory adding jokes inbetween your narration like oversimplified or historia civilis really adds up to the quality of the video.Keep up the great work!

I thought your portrait was stalin. Then I looked closely. Who is it?

@@shashwatsinha2704 - Myself some years ago.

@@LuisAldamiz Oh, great. You genuinely look like a businessman-philospher.

@Red SITH what's your point?

@Red SITH Good one, except that the greatest centers of Jewish diaspora and early Christian thought were thoroughly Hellenized centers like Alexandria and Antioch, in fact Septuagint was translated to Greek during the Ptolemies, and despite the great conflicts between Hellenized Jews and the Orthodox ones, and the unsuccessful and violent attempts at Hellenization, the Jews were thoroughly immersed in the Hellenistic culture of the age, both during the actual Hellenistic and later Roman era. The Greek influence was felt long after their political power failed, thats why it is still important. Theirs was a secondary language in the Roman empire, it was even used by the Parthians long after the Seleucids, also in Bactria and Northwest India. it was the language of science, their conventions of architecture were influential for the entire Mediterranean world AND the east. Look at the ruins of Palmyra or Petra, with clearly Greek columns, long after the last Greek kingdoms fell.. And I'm not even going to joke about the influence of Greek on Christianity. From the first Bibles being in Greek, first Christian communities being Greek, to the neoplatonists looking for inspiration in works Plato , to the art and architecture of Byzantine empire. As I said, both religions had their development in the melting pot that was the Hellenistic age. Christianity had its roots directly, while Jewish history was definitely shaped by it to a great degree.

@Red SITH Lol what are you talking about? :D I did not say that Hellenization or Hellenistic RELIGIONS influenced them I said they were built or changed, influenced and shaped by the Hellenistic AGE in which they existed. Read about the Jewish Hanukkah and how its origins are strictly tied to the political landscape of the age. The Jewish national and religious identity was forged by the Ptolemaic and Seleucid attempts to conquer and control their lands, the day to day politics of that age shaped the religion as we know it today. And the earliest communities of Christians were also Greek, most of cities mentioned by the Bible that are not in the Holy Land are Greek and Hellenised cities like Ephesus, Thessaloniki and Corinth and many others. And Greek being one of the first languages of the Bible.

I think that's because this channel has a higher level view, focusing on the big picture. While K&G dives deeper into battles and moments in time.

- here, great king. for these reasons, you need such a helmet. it will serve your political ambitions perfectly. - yes........... But it still looks ridiculous... Oh, F it!

thanks

@Zen Tao i would pay to see this alternate timeline. i wonder who the mongols would fight in this region some day

@Zen Tao could you explain your theory on how christian cruzaders would made to southeast asia ?

@Zen Tao yes ! i absolutely agree with you. christian feudal middle easteners would be occupying mesopotamia and the surroundings down into the middle ages until the mongols crush their positions there. i was only confused about the :" and maybe fight crusaders in australia and indonesia "

@Zen Tao well. the cruzaders where so much more distant. not like that would be a problem for experienced knights, i mean look how further north the teutonics went. but the cruzaders had many hadaches arround canaã and spain to care about that distant arquipelago until the age of navigation. anyhow i loved your theory.. imagine if zeng he´s fleet was not burned in this timeline too. the landscape of the whole middle east would be very curious.

@Zen Tao they could. the question for me is they would ? and left eastern europe vunerable to steppe nomads of the north. yes they have fortifications in mesopotamia by now. so possibly a very bold christian leader may had insisted on leading troops to indonesia.

why? (a curious query not a confrontational one)

Yaaaas King.

severely understudied as coins minted during his European conquest were found as far as Romania meaning he had firm control for a short time

*sarcasm intensifies*

Knock knock Its Chandra gupta. He says get the hell out of here . Will you get the hell out of here if I give you 500 elephants. Ok thnx bye. Time to CONQUER ALL OF INDIAAAA !!

@CARNAGE !!! Just search Histroy of entire world I guess by Willy brutz and then spend your lazy ass time in watching that 19min vidio and only after that you are eligible in replying me.

I believe that the Mosaic of Alexander is the most accurate depiction of him :)

Mine too! Old one eye and his son is probably my second favorite.

@@EpimetheusHistory Mine too!

Eumenes will probably always remain my favourite... who else defeated Seleucos and Antigonus in battle? Only treason would bring his downfall.

But I reckon we all agree on whom to like the least... Cassander 😌

@@Crafty_Spirit him or Ptolemy Keraunos

1 greek princess < 500 trained war elephants !

@@zuboy4272 To paraphrase and change that Trump quote "This has been the best trade deal in the history of trade deals, maybe ever"

Welcome

@@zuboy4272 1 greek princess + 700k million sqkm of land west of indus *

_Laughs in Crisis of the Third Century_

Indeed. Seleucids should get some more love....

maybe because it is considered an "Eastern empire", rather than a "Western empire", but in eastern history they are very well covered, as they are looked as Iranians, Iraqiac, Syrians, Afghans, Turkmenic, etc

@@omarbradley6807 So, even in eastern historiography, the hellenized [Greek] character of the ruling class of that Empire is largely downsized? It was a multiethnic Empire, but some parts of its culture had a Greek/Hellenistic influence, that even the Parthians that conquered much of its lands kept for some time after the conquest of Iran [the Arsacids are said to have enjoyed theater, a staple part of Greek culture].

@@user-zz8ll5ry7r Of course who the Macedonian/Thracian/Greek influence helped the empire, but, the people from the "Western world" ignored the Seleucids, because they where, an advanced society, in the east. while in the eastern cultures it is knowed who the royal family was kind of a Macedonian/Sogdian, Macedionian/Epirote, Macedonian/Seleucid dynasty, the Satrapies where under the local kings, or Shas, that is why the Seleucids where Basileus but also Shanahashas, (kings of kings)

@@user-zz8ll5ry7r discord.gg/Yj2yusGHqU

That's because only Persians ruled Persia. Suck it.

And then he fucked it up completely and set in motion it's decline and fall. They should have won the decicive battle againt the Romans, and this would have changed history completely, with the Seleucids becoming the dominant force in Greece, rather than the Romans. But no, after his right flank cavalry broke the roman flank, they decided to go raid the roman camp, while the main army was still engaged in battle, and with some bad luck involved ended up losing. If he had swung around the cav and hit the romans from behind, they would have won.

@@BamBamGT1 really shoukd have given hannibal command of the land force

​@@BamBamGT1what greed does to a mf

Guess they even took that from Alex

Thanks! More to come! :)