030: The Seleucid Empire - Antiochus I, Last King of the Universe

Hi there, you're listening to The Hellenistic Age Podcast, episode 30, The Seleucid Empire, Antiochus I, the last king of the universe. In our last episode, we covered the reign of Seleucus I, the former commander of Alexander the Great, turned founder of the Seleucid Empire, who managed to conquer a territory based largely in Syria and Mesopotamia, stretching to Asia Minor and the borders of India. With his death in 281 BC, the throne would now be passed to his successor, Antiochus, who I have spoken little about thus far in the narrative. We are going to have to rewind the clock a bit to understand the role of Antiochus during his father's reign, as there are important details otherwise untold and are relevant to his later career. But before we begin, I would like to rectify an error I had made during the last episode. I previously said that we only have Seleucus' mother, Laodice on record, and that the later city of Antioch was named after Seleucus' son of the same name. I don't know how I missed it, but we do know the name of Seleucus' father, it also just happens to be Antiochus, and the city of Antioch was actually named after him, not for Seleucus' son. It's a minor error, but I wanted to just make it clear. Antiochus I, son of Seleucus I and his wife Apama, was born sometime around the turn of the decade, circa 320 BC. We don't know for sure when he was born, but based upon our evidence we can The union of his parents at the mass weddings of Susa in late 324 suggests a birth no earlier than 323, and his participation in the Battle of Ipsus in 301 can't allow him to be born later than 317 since he would only be 16 years old commanding the cavalry, which is a stretch even for the ancient world. Thus, I think 320 is not an unreasonable year to choose for the sake of simplicity. When looking at the first generation of kings following the initial founding dynasts of the Hellenistic Big Three, that be the Seleucids, Ptolemies, and Antigonids, it is Antiochus that proves to be the most unique in terms of his heritage. One of the big points of contention that arose out of the initial council meetings following Alexander the Great's death was that his heir, Alexander IV, was not of full Macedonian blood by way of his bactrian mother Roxana. Many soldiers and officers refused to acknowledge the child and preferred to choose a mentally disabled yet 100% Macedonian relative to prop on the throne instead. Antiochus is very similar to Alexander IV in the sense that while his father was Macedonian, his mother Apama was a Sogdian-Persian noblewoman, making him a royal heir of mixed ethnicity. Now, when Antiochus was born, he wasn't immediately thrust into a royal household since Seleucus would not officially declare himself as king of Babylon for over a decade, so he was just like the many children fathered by the Macedonian soldiers who campaigned across Asia and took wives. However, his half-Sogdian origins would almost certainly assist him in his claims of legitimacy in controlling a predominantly Asian kingdom. Later propagandists would try to make the doubtful claim that Apama was a relative of Darius III, the last king of Achaemenid Persia, in order to offer a sense of unbroken succession to the Persian subjects, but perhaps it did allow for a greater general acceptance of Seleucid rule in the eastern territories of the empire. We have almost no information about Antiochus's life prior to his participation in the fourth war of the Diadophoi, where at the age of 19 he would serve alongside his father as a commander of the cavalry facing the army of Antigonus Monophthalmos and Demetrius Polyarchetes on the plains of Ipsus in 301. Antiochus showed considerable skill and tactical flexibility when he was able to trick the hot-headed Demetrius into a wild chase off the battlefield, leading to Antigonus's death and the Antigonid army scattered. The subsequent partitioning of the Antigonid empire had expanded Seleucid territory into Syria and Asia Minor, but fate would lead Antiochus into a new direction. Being the sole male heir to Seleucis meant that Antiochus was now directly in line for the throne, and to prepare his successor with the burdens of rule, Antiochus was given some level of administrative power, as evidenced by a surviving inscription from Didyma in Asia Minor, whereby Antiochus is specifically named as one of the sponsoring kings of the construction of the temple to Apollo, and the various royal honors bestowed upon he for his piety and good graces, etc. etc. By the late 290s, Antiochus was made joint ruler by his father, approximately in 292 BC according to a Babylonian chronicle, which lists Antiochus as Marshari, or crown prince. This simple inscription does not reveal the full complexities of this handing of imperial authority from father to son, an event already obscured by a rather fantastical story. According to Plutarch, Antiochus was nearly on the verge of death from some unknown illness which was inexplicable to everyone involved. The royal physician, a man called Eris Estratus, had been the only one to figure out what the condition actually was, based upon his observations of the crown prince's symptoms. A fluttering heartbeat, sweaty complexion, a nervous stutter, uncontrollable moodiness? The truth was, Antiochus was lovesick. Unfortunately, the object of the crown prince's desire was none other than Sir Adonike, the young second wife of Seleucus, making the whole affair politically awkward and uncomfortably incestuous. The only solution presented by the doctor was that the king should divorce Sir Adonike and give her hand in marriage to Antiochus, something which Seleucus gladly did, claiming he would give up his entire kingdom so Antiochus could be happy. Thus, a great wedding was commenced and they all lived happily ever after. So, let us address this fairy tale like story and get some context. I will spare you all my discussion on royal incest until we get to the Ptolemies, but suffice it to say that this is a rather unusual state of affairs. The whole forbidden romance story is almost certainly a fabrication. Whether it was some bizarre tradition sprung up through rumor or purposeful disinformation spread by the royal house, scholars like John D. Granger and A. B. Brebart have pointed out the numerous pragmatic reasons why Seleucus handed Stratonike over to his son. First, Stratonike was a daughter of Demetrius Polyarchates, who had just recently assumed the Macedonian throne in 294, and Seleucus had insulted him by seizing Cilicia, thus raising tensions between the two. Second, introducing a young woman like Stratonike as a second wife could complicate the royal succession. If she had produced a male heir, this could create strife between Seleucus and Antiochus and put the whole kingdom at risk, and it also was an insult to the haughty Demetrius if Stratonike was relegated to a secondary wife's position, assuming that Antiochus' mother Epamma was still alive and the primary wife. If Seleucus handed Stratonike over to his son, this would both please Demetrius, since she would be the primary wife of a joint king, and also keep an Antigonid family member far away from the center of Seleucid power in Syria, as I shall explain in a moment. Additionally, Antiochus was in need of a wife and heir himself, since he was nearly 30 years old by this point, so it would relieve a lot of tension in the royal household. He and Stratonike would remain married up till Antiochus' death, and together they would produce at least four children, two daughters named Epamma and Phila, and two sons, Seleucus and Antiochus, later to be known as Antiochus II Theos. We'll soon explain why it was just Antiochus II and not Seleucus II. In the same year, 293, Antiochus was elevated to the status of co-king, and designated as the, quote, lord of the upper satrapies. In effect, Antiochus was sent out east to govern the satrapies of Babylonia, the Persian heartland, and Bactria, the latter two being the most important considering that Seleucus had just spent a considerable amount of time reincorporating these huge territories under Macedonian control. This had the double effect of allowing Antiochus to flex his kingly muscles by ensuring that the administrative institutions of the realm were put into place, and it also gave him the free reign to operate without treading over his father's superior authority. It is unclear on whether or not the whole Stratonachy affair had strained the relationship between the two, but it is something to consider. During his time in Babylon, we have a number of recovered inscriptions discussing his actions. The most pronounced feature of them all is his piety, or more likely his royal patronage, towards the traditional gods of Mesopotamia and Babylonia. Babylon in particular is subject to a number of documented actions of Antiochus, perhaps no doubt thanks to the destructive nature of the Babylonian war almost twenty years before, and so rebuilding the most important religious sites of the region was a good way for Antiochus to get good graces with the local population, the religious elite of Babylon, and perhaps with the gods themselves. Tablets record Antiochus offering gifts to the twin temples of the Babylonian moon god Shin, and his extensive reconstruction of the ruined temple of Esagila, sanctuary of the protector god Marduk, no thanks to the help of elephant crews to clean up the rubble and clear the way for builders to start the work. As a reminder that nobody, not even a king, is able to escape the inevitability of embarrassing yourself at an important function, the author of one of the tablets records that Antiochus tripped over himself while conducting the ceremonial rites for the temple's inauguration. Poor guy, considering that this was probably seen as a bad omen, given that the king was a go-between for the mortal and the divine. Our best surviving record from this period on Antiochus' actions is the so-called Antiochus' Cylinder, found beneath the ruins of the temple of Isida in Forsippa. If you aren't familiar with the term cylinder in this context, this was a Mesopotamian tradition practiced by many rulers, most famously by Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Persian empire. It is a barrel-shaped object made of clay, approximately under a foot in size, with an inscription written in the Akkadian cuneiform language. These cylinders were often interred into the foundations of new buildings, especially temples, whereby the ruler speaks of their own piety towards the gods and their deeds. The Antiochus' Cylinder dates to 268 BC, later in the reign, but I do think it's relevant to talk about it now. The first line of the inscriptions read as follows. Antiochus, the great king, the mighty king, king of the world, king of Babylon, king of all countries, caretaker of Asagela and Isida, foremost son of Seleucus, the king, the Macedonian, king of Babylon, am I. When I desired to build Asagela and Isida, the first bricks of Asagela and Isida, in the land of Hatti, with my pure hands I molded with the fine quality oil, and for the laying of the foundation of Asagela and Isida, I transported them. In the month of Vardaru, on the twentieth day of year forty-three, I laid the foundation of Isida, the true temple, the temple of Nabu, which is in Sippa. The rest of the inscription invokes a lengthy prayer to the Mesopotamian pantheon, including a direct reference to Queen Stratonica. But I cannot stress how important the Cylinder is. It gives us insight not only in regards to the activities of Antiochus I, but also demonstrates how the Seleucid monarchy was fully prepared and willing to incorporate the iconography and roles of their Babylonian and Mesopotamian subjects. Alexander was in the initial stages of this transformation during his reign, but by Antiochus' period, the Seleucid kings were more than comfortable to play the part, at least in terms of the rituals of a Near Eastern monarch. The specific line, King of the World, can also be translated as King of the Universe, Shar-Kishati, an Akkadian term with roots going back to Sargon II of Akkad in the third millennium BC, and based on the evidence, Antiochus I is the last confirmed ruler to have the title, though it is very likely later Seleucid kings also carried it as well. Antiochus' work was not limited to matters of the divine. On the same tablets, the Chronicler states that Antiochus oversaw the depopulation of Babylon of its Macedonian subjects, transferring them over to the recently founded Seleucia on the Tigris, and he continued the expansion of the Seleucid realm, primarily working through his subordinate commanders. Although Seleucus had managed to recapture the bulk of the eastern provinces, barring his withdrawal of the Incan satrapies in the Kedrosian desert, Antiochus wanted to solidify his hold over the remaining territories and expand into untouched regions, mainly Sogdiana, the homeland of his mother. We can assume that this would be re-establishing the administrative workings of the realm, installing loyal satraps in much the same way the provinces were governed by the Persian Empire, and engaging in some city founding. Yet, much of Antiochus' actions during his tenure as lord of the upper satrapies still remains a mystery to us. But in August or September of 281, Antiochus would receive word that Seleucus was assassinated by the renegade Ptolemy Karinus, who had fled to the recently vacated throne of Macedon to proclaim himself king to all those around. Naturally, with the death of any great ruler in such a manner, and no doubt Karinus would want his right to rule to be broadcasted in such a manner, word spread rapidly across the realm, with two main problems ensuring that despite Seleucus' best planning, the transfer of power would be anything but smooth. The first and most immediate crisis on Antiochus' hands was the internal rebellion in Seleucid-controlled Syria, the realm known as Seleucis. There isn't much regarding what the exact details of this rebellion were. It was likely a combination of native Syrian contempt in response to the years of Antigonid and later Seleucid and Ptolemaic settlement and warfare, but also the latent opportunism for revolting since Antiochus was far away. The administrative difficulties of the size of the empire was rearing its ugly head. Since we don't know where Antiochus was at the time of his father's death, but we can assume it was nowhere near the center of imperial power, and it would take time to reach back to home base and retrieve his father's body. The revolt would be quelled within the year, but with no word on exactly how it was solved, how aggressively independent the rebels were, nor the response of Antiochus, it remains largely a mystery to us. What would be more problematic in the long term would be the affairs in the west, in Asia Minor. Asia Minor had long been a troubled region, even under Alexander the Great, who largely bypassed much of the more problematic areas in favor of pursuing Darius and conquering Egypt. The successors who ruled over the territory, Antigonus, Lysimachus, and eventually Seleucus, had to come to terms with the many power brokers in the region, who had planted themselves firmly in their own domains. These powerful men weren't just independent Macedonian officials like Philotyros, the soon-to-be founder of the Adalid dynasty of Pergamon, but they also included ex-Persian nobilities such as Mithridates I of Pontus, who declared himself king along the southeast coast of the Black Sea, or the native Anatolian named Zippoetes, who founded the Kidium of Bithynia in the 280s. With the wealth of the Black Sea trade funding the coffers of these local lords and hazardous terrain unsuited for outside invasions, it was more convenient for Hellenistic kings to engage in diplomacy rather than out to conquest, and Antiochus was no exception. Seleucus had formerly claimed the bulk of southern Asia Minor, stretching to the Lydian capital of Sardis, but now Antiochus had to contend with these renegade rulers, who started to ally themselves into a northern league in order to secure their new domains, especially with the immediate presence of Seleucus no longer an issue. Most of the conflicts would be at the negotiating table, with Antiochus reaffirming control of whatever portion of Anatolia he had left. Things would be exacerbated by the intervention of Nicomedes of Bithynia, in a war that arose between Antiochus and Antigonus Gonatas, the son of Demetrius Polyarchetes, who still had a military presence in Greece despite his father's demise in Seleucid captivity. Nothing was truly gained during the fighting between the pair, and Asia Minor would remain a future thorn in the Seleucid's side. In the end, however, Antiochus would not be seen as an outside invader for long, and in fact would become the savior of Anatolia, thanks to his war with an oncoming threat, who had just began to stream from Greece and into Asia. In the 270s BC, the land of Asia Minor was facing a brand new threat. Giant barbarians from Northwest Europe had begun to swarm over the Bosporus and ravage the cities along the coastline, plundering and pillaging anything or anyone they deemed valuable, with seemingly little capable of stopping them. These were a people known as the Celts, and I talked a great deal about their mass invasion of the Greek peninsula and Anatolia in episode 20. In summary, the Celts had long been on the periphery of the Greek world up until the time of Alexander the Great, being concentrated largely within Central and Western Europe. Overpopulation and increased trade with the Mediterranean civilizations had led warlords and tribes to migrate further south and east in search of land, and more importantly, plunder, with wine and other Mediterranean goods being of particular interest. This led to the eventual sacking of Rome by Brennus in 390, while a warband also led by a chief named Brennus had lapped the edges of Macedon in 280. Their first encounter with the regicidal Ptolemy Kerenas had led to the destruction of the Macedonian army, and Antiochus got his revenge when Ptolemy's head was placed upon a spike and carried around the Celtic line. The next year, Brennus' army stormed much of Greece, unsuccessfully besieging the famed sanctuary of Delphi, before being scattered and sent all over Greece and Thrace before looking to cross the Bosphorus. The arrival of the Celts had also served to the benefit, well, I mean, at least initially, to the recently independent kings of Anatolia, primarily the new Nicomedes I of Bithynia. In need of some manpower to bolster his side during a civil war between him and his brother Zippoides, and perhaps to hinder further Seleucid revenge for Nicomedes' involvement in the Seleucid-Antigonid War, Nicomedes took it upon himself to invite over the tribes of the Telisto-Bogiai, Tektosages, and Throchmy to come serve in return for resettlement, pay, and plunder. Zippoides' warriors were soon outclassed, and Nicomedes became the undisputed lord of Bithynia. However, the Celts seemed to have only developed a further taste for Eastern goods, whether it was extracted through fire and sword, or blackmail, and they proved to be a devastating force on the local populace. Surviving inscriptions indicate the sense of dread inflicted upon the local population, with tales of rapine and mass murder rivaling any horror story. By 275, the cavalry would be called in, so to speak, when Antiochus would engage in one of his greatest victories, the so-called Battle of the Elephants. We have no details in regards to the timing or location, maybe 20,000 troops on Antiochus's side and an undetermined number of Celts on the other, but we know that the elephants apparently played a decisive role, hence Battle of the Elephants. The victory was a huge boost to Antiochus's prestige and standing within the region, depicting him as a vanguard of civilization against the wild barbarian invaders, granting him the title of Soter, or Savior. Curiously, Antiochus also showed a degree of clemency towards his defeated Celtic foes, preferring to settle them in Central Asia Minor, in and around modern Ankara, a land that would become Gallograecia, or Galatia. On a pragmatic level, it may be a way for Antiochus to annoy the independent kingdoms like Pontus and Bithynia, by placing such an aggressive peoples to act as a somewhat loyal buffer state. But they would serve as a perpetual annoyance over the next few centuries, and a hotbed of mercenary recruitment to bolster the armies of the other parts of the region. Just when you think Antiochus could rest from dealing with internal rebellion and barbarian invasion, it seems that the other Hellenistic kings had something else in mind. In the year 274, Antiochus was faced with another great threat, when forces, headed by the Egyptian king Ptolemy II Philadelphos, streamed into Seleucid-controlled Syria, igniting the first of what would become nine Syrian wars, fought between the houses of Seleucus and Ptolemy over a period of 110 years. None of this was unprecedented though, and the root causes of the conflict stretch as far back as the initial carving up of Antigonid territory after the Battle of Ipsus in 301. Relations between Seleucus and Ptolemy I remained relatively cool until their deaths, but active antagonism would arise between their immediate successors. Seleucus' assassin, Ptolemy Kerenes, was Philadelphos' half-brother, and though there isn't any substantiated evidence for his compliance in the murder, it must have been the sore spot for Antiochus. And it didn't help that Philadelphos had also busied himself by seizing former Lysimachean island ports while Antiochus was trying to solve internal problems because of the assassination. Perhaps Ptolemy's hand wouldn't have been forced had not Antiochus been engaging in a series of diplomatic maneuvers himself. The first was a marriage alliance in 275 between his half-sister Phila and Antigonus Gonatas, who had taken the opportunity to declare himself Kik Macedon after securing a victory over the band of Celts roaming the region, leaving Philadelphos understandably nervous about his political isolation. But the most direct attack was Antiochus' marriage arrangement for his daughter Apama to a man known as Magas, yet another of Philadelphos' half-siblings who had imperial ambitions of his own, turning west of Egypt and conquering the province known as Cyrenaica, or Cyrene in modern Libya, and declaring himself king. A brief civil war would ensue between the brothers as Magas would unsuccessfully invade Egypt in 275, but was prevented from seeking further action due to internal instability. Combine that with Antiochus' recent adulation for his victory against the Galatians, Philadelphos needed to bolster his prestige. And what better way than to settle old scores by trying to claim further territory into the Levant and capture Seleucid-held Syria. Despite all of this build-up on why the First Syrian War actually broke out, we are once again without much in the way of sources covering the exact events that transpired. Bits and pieces survive, thanks once again to the Babylonian records, which list Antiochus bringing in supplies such as silver and cloth and elephant troops to aid in the conflict. Apparently this was quite taxing on the Seleucid population, who had to move from using silver coin money to merely copper, in addition to a number of outbreaks of disease and food shortages. It wasn't any easier for Ptolemy though, since he seemed to have underestimated Antiochus' extensive military experience and the fortified cities built on the orders of Seleucus I, since evidence suggests that Antiochus managed to penetrate south of Ptolemaic Syria, encouraging both Philadelphos and his sister-wife Arsinoe II to oversee fortifications along the Nile Delta. In the end though, despite the Egyptian propaganda suggesting that Ptolemy was the victor in the conflict, in typically Egyptian terms, the war was ultimately a stalemate. Borders did not effectively shift, and the peace treaty signed in 271 seems not to have been signed with concessions going to either party. What this conflict does reveal though, is a pattern of behavior to emerge in the successive Syrian wars, whereby the two kings would sign a peace treaty to cease all hostilities, until one of them would die, and the surviving ruler would launch a military campaign again into Syria. This is because treaties were personal, bound to the honor of the kings, and it would only last between the lifespans of the kings involved. Once one died, the gloves were off, and the treaty was now seen as null and void. With all of these wars taking up Antiochus' time, how were things on the home front? City planning was as familiar to Antiochus as it was to his father, and the king had done some extensive work throughout his reign from Asia Minor to Bactria. During his tenure in the east, Antiochus managed to found the famed city of Iqanum in modern Afghanistan, later home to the Greco-Bactrian kings, and did a number of construction works in Asia Minor, possibly as a way to combat Ptolemaic influence. Antiochus had also furthered diplomatic ties with the Mauryan Empire in India, which passed from Chandragupta to his son Bindusara, and then the more famous Ashoka the Great. Still, we are unfortunately without sources regarding the activities of Antiochus, and it remains ultimately a mystery to us down to his final years. Although Antiochus was continually successful in his efforts in holding the empire together, his last decade as king would prove to be more taxing, both physically and emotionally. In eastern Asia Minor, the commander of Pergamon, Philotyros, would die, passing control to his nephew Eumenes in 263 BC. Philotyros was a loyal ally to Antiochus, for it was he who was responsible for safekeeping Seleucus' body following Ptolemy Kerenes' treachery, but Eumenes had no desire to play along with Seleucus' interests. He instead proclaimed himself Lord of Pergamon, effectively founding the Atlas Kingdom, and sprung a surprise invasion into the region surrounding Sardis. Rather than pursuing a full-scale war, Antiochus instead threw up his hands and signed a peace treaty with Eumenes, begrudgingly acknowledging the latter's new independence. The loss of Pergamon may have stung Antiochus' pride, but what occurred just a few years before would have shaken the royal household to its core. In 267, the main heir to the throne, Seleucus, was executed on Antiochus' orders, making the younger son Antiochus II the new successor. What exactly happened to cause such events to transpire in such a manner? Seleucus had been a made joint king for many years, much like Antiochus was with his father, and even a number of Babylonian chronicles recognized him as much a ruling figure as Antiochus. Author John D. Granger points out that the whole affair must have been intrigue on the part of Seleucus, who may have been impatient at succeeding to the throne, and sought to remove Antiochus whatever way possible. The only appropriate response to such treachery was to kill Seleucus, marking the first time in Seleucus' history where members of the royal family had killed one another, and it certainly would not be the last. Whatever the case, Antiochus II, as he would soon be called, was now the main successor, and Antiochus I Soter would himself die only a few years later, in June 261, shortly after his defeat by Eumenes of Pergamon, ending a reign that lasted well over 20 years, if we take into account his role as joint king, and he was around 60 years old. The kingship of Antiochus I Soter could be marked as one of perpetual conflict, not that Hellenistic kings were doing anything but committing to warfare, but since his father's assassination in 281, Antiochus had to deal with threats from multiple fronts, both externally and from within. The fragmentation of Asia Minor had undone a lot of his father's work, and left a number of contender states who would later pick away at Seleucid holdings over its life, and the first Syrian war showed the threat of Ptolemaic Egypt was ever present on his back doorstep. Such was the consequence of the kingdom's size, but also the problems of royal succession were made apparent upon Seleucus' attempted uprising, contrasted with the amicable partnership between Antiochus I and Seleucus I. Still, Antiochus managed to prove himself as a competent successor to Seleucus, managing to hold his own against the invading Celts and Ptolemy Philadelphos, and these problems cannot be attributed to anything but due to the inheritance of the great machine that was the Seleucid realm, issues that would make themselves only more apparent during the reign of Antiochus II Theos, and it is here we will leave the narrative of the Seleucids. Thank you all for listening and supporting the show, and with this most recent episode, I have also updated the Seleucid family tree on my website to represent Antiochus I and his children, so please feel free to check that out if you are feeling a bit confused on who's who. If you want to support the show, please take the time to leave a review on iTunes or the platform of your choice, or if you want to get in contact with me to ask questions, comment about the show, or just chat, feel free and drop me a line on either my Twitter or Facebook page, or you can shoot me an email as well. All of these links will be provided in the show notes, along with the episode bibliography. So, until next time, you've been listening to The Hellenistic Age Podcast.