190 BC and the heirs of Alexander face a grave threat. Over the past nine years, a new power has thrust itself onto the Greek World intent on wrestling control. That power is Rome, home of the Senate and ‘City of Seven Hills.’

Achieving great success the Romans now find themselves within touching distance of toppling Hellenistic supremacy in the Eastern Mediterranean. Yet one powerful Kingdom still remains, its ruler determined to protect his hard-won primacy. Legion vs phalanx, this inevitable battle is to decide which culture will reign supreme.

Background: Rome in 200 BC

By this time, Rome was in the process of becoming the dominant power in the Mediterranean. From small beginnings in Central Italy, over the past 200 years, the ‘City of Seven Hills’ had transformed into the epicentre of one of the most powerful nations in the West. The rewards duly followed.

The Illyrians, Insubres, Syracusans and Carthaginians – all once-great powers that by 200 BC, had fallen under the yoke of the Roman war machine. Rome’s supremacy in the Western Mediterranean was now undisputed. Yet this was only the beginning. Another conquest was soon to occur.

The 2nd Macedonian War: 200 BC – 197 BC

To the East across the Ionian Sea lay the Kingdom of Macedon – home of Alexander the Great and epicentre of the prominent Hellenistic World. By 200 BC Macedonia’s rulers were some of the most powerful in the Mediterranean, priding themselves as the rightful heirs to the famed Argeads. They had gathered a formidable reputation; Rome would now put it to the test.

Seizing the chance to put their mark on the beating heart of the infamous Greek World and gain the gratitude of the libertarian Greek cities – who were desperate to be free from Macedonian rule – Rome rapidly prevailed over the Macedonians. Alexander’s Hellenistic descendants in Europe had finally met their match. Their dominance in Macedonia and Greece – two of the greatest pillars of past Greek power – was at an end.

Yet although their victory over the Macedonians marked a remarkable achievement, in reality the Romans had only scratched the surface of Greek military power. Alexander’s Successors did not reside purely in Macedon and Greece. Further east, one other Hellenistic Kingdom still outshone the Romans with both its size and strength.

The Seleucid Empire

At the time of Rome’s victory against the Macedonians, the Seleucid Empire was the most powerful Kingdom in Ancient Asia. Yet this supremacy had not always been the case.

223 BC: Struggle

For much of the 3rd century BC, following the death of their founder Seleucus, this Kingdom had been in almost-constant decline. Inheriting a vastly over-extended empire, Seleucus’ successors had faced a nigh-impossible task, proving incapable of managing such a diverse population (Greeks, Persians, Indians, Bactrians etc). Its result was turmoil.

The Galatians, Ptolemies, Attalids and Greco-Bactrians – just a few hostile neighbouring powers that by 223 BC had made the most of this struggle, seizing land where they could. The Seleucid Kingdom’s complete demise looked only a matter of time. One man, however, had other ideas.

Antiochus III

Ascending the throne in 223 BC, Antiochus aimed to reverse his Kingdom’s current plight and restore Seleucid supremacy in the Near-East. It would be no easy task. To achieve this goal, he would have to re-unite lands stretching from the borders of India in the East to Macedonia in the West under his rule. Yet Antiochus remained undeterred.

Rebuilding the empire

For the next 26 years, the Seleucid ruler would conduct numerous military campaigns. From fighting in Asia Minor (Anatolia), Egypt and Bactria (Afghanistan) to successful diplomacy with various neighbouring kings – including an Indian local ruler called Sophagasenus – gradually Antiochus’ persistence began to reap rewards.

Looking west

By 197 BC, Antiochus’ dedication had met with exceptional success. Having restored his Kingdom’s primacy in Ancient Asia, he had achieved one of the greatest ‘Empire revivals’ in antiquity. Yet Antiochus had no intention of halting his Kingdom’s expansion just yet. One more conquest still had to be made; his ancestors’ former lands in Europe remained outside his control. They would be next.

Crossing over the Hellespont (now the Dardanelles) into Europe, Antiochus quickly reaffirmed his Kingdom’s control on Thrace and the vital Chersonese – lands spear-won by Seleucus over 85 years before. Antiochus now had a solid foothold on European soil, heralding a simple message: He was here to stay.

Uneasy news

For the Romans, hearing of this new presence in Europe was most unwelcome. Only recently had they emerged victorious over the powerful Macedonians; now, to their horror, an even stronger Hellenistic Kingdom was attempting to cement its authority on the Greek World. Suspicious of the true extent of Antiochus’ European ambitions, Rome made its position known:

So long as both Macedonia and any remaining independent Greek cities remained unharmed, Rome – although uneasy at Antiochus’ presence in Europe and the fact that Hannibal, their greatest enemy, was residing in his court – would not pursue war with this powerful Greco-Asian king. All, however, was about to change.

One step too far

In 192 BC, following four years of uneasy relations, Antiochus finally breached the line of Roman patience.

Sailing from Asia Minor with a relatively small force of 10,000 men the Seleucid King landed in Greece and seized control of several cities. The Romans had always been suspicious of Antiochus’ true intentions; now they had been proved right.

192 BC: the Romano-Seleucid War erupts

In this act, Antiochus had crossed the line of no return. The Romans – viewing themselves as the new champions of Greek liberty in the Aegean – knew war was now inevitable.

To many, this would have seemed a daunting prospect. Not only was Antiochus’ Empire massive, but Antiochus’ previous military successes had been so formidable that he was already being hailed by some as the next great Greek general – the next Alexander.

Everything therefore looked set on this war being one of the hardest Rome had ever fought. Yet this Italian power had thwarted such esteemed Hellenistic generals before; now they aimed to do it again. Gathering their armies once more, they prepared for war.

Thermopylae

What followed would surprise even the Romans. Antiochus, seeing his supposed Greek support abandoning him, soon suffered a crushing defeat to Rome at Thermopylae.

Hastily retreating to Asia Minor, Antiochus’ campaigning in Greece had quickly turned into a catastrophe, unnecessarily losing face among many of his subjects – his expedition had proved reckless and ill-prepared. Yet Antiochus remained undeterred.

Although a personal blow, Antiochus’ failure in Greece was only a minor setback. His lands in both Thrace and around the Hellespont – the doorway to Europe – still remained firmly in Seleucid control. He was intent on keeping it that way.

Quickly restrengthening, Antiochus’ forces once again crossed the Hellespont and entrenched themselves inside Lysimacheia, their most formidable stronghold in Europe. On their arrival, Antiochus ordered his men to gather supplies, sharpen the fortifications and prepare to weather the coming storm; the Roman armies were on their way.

In Thrace therefore, did Antiochus’ men aim to make up for their King’s recent failure in Thessaly. Fate, however had other ideas.

Problems at sea

Sadly for Antiochus, things would once again not go according to plan. Not all the fighting was currently happening on land. At sea, thanks mainly to having an alliance with Rhodes, one of the greatest maritime powers of the time, Rome continued to defy expectation.

Following two crushing victories over their opponents – including one in which Hannibal himself was the opposing commander – the Romans succeeded in wrestling control of the Mediterranean from their enemy; a crushing blow for Antiochus’ European ambitions. Its effect on the Seleucid King would be significant.

The mistake

Panicking on hearing of his navy’s defeats, Appian recalls Antiochus’ next blunder,

Everything unnerved him, and the deity took away his reasoning powers, so that he abandoned the Chersoneses without cause … leaving all these sinews of war in good condition for the enemy.

{App. Syr. 6.28}

Antiochus, distressed by his recent defeats, therefore abandoned his final holdings in Europe. Lysimacheia, a city he had re-built from ruin into one of the most formidable fortresses in Europe, was simply left without a fight. The Romans could not believe their luck. Yet the war was still far from over.

Antiochus had already revealed once before his expansionist desires to the Romans; how could they trust such a man to refrain from conducting another, more formidable campaign against them in the future? They could not allow him to remain in command of a powerful kingdom right on Europe’s doorstep. Further action had to be taken.

Crossing the divide

To solve this, Rome decided on a radical plan of action, agreeing – for the first time in their history – to send an army across the Hellespont into Asia. Reaching that land, they aimed to confront Antiochus in his own territory and remove the threat he posed indefinitely. Under the overall command of the consul Lucius Scipio – who was seconded by his famed older brother Scipio ‘Africanus’ – this army therefore set off to become the first Roman army in Asia.

Crossing the Hellespont completely unhindered, the Scipios quickly achieved this milestone. From now on, Rome would be the invaders.

A reversal of fortune

Within six years of his crossing into Europe, Antiochus found himself back at step one. His expeditionary force into Greece had been routed, his fleets severely weakened and all his well-stocked and fortified defences in Thrace had fallen uncontested into the hands of his enemy.

Now finding himself fighting a war in his own territory, Antiochus could not afford any more blunders; the future of his kingdom as a superpower depended on it. Determined to expel the Roman invaders, he once again prepared to fight.

Ever since his retreat from Lysimacheia, Antiochus had been gathering a vast army from across his large Eastern Domain – the best the Seleucid Empire could offer. Now Antiochus aimed to show the Romans the true power of his extensive Kingdom.

Preparing for battle

Following a brief period of manoeuvring, counter-manoeuvring and failed negotiations, the two sides made camp near the town of Magnesia in Lydia. Battle was imminent.

Scipio’s army

Triumphing the strength of their own people, Scipio’s army centred around its powerful Roman infantry and its flexible Manipular formation. Although aided with an equal number of Italian allies, it was these Roman citizens and their style of fighting that had been key to Rome’s past successes. Only recently had they defeated a Hellenistic army with this formation; now they hoped to do it again.

The Roman army did not consist solely of Italian forces however. Among Scipio’s ranks were some formidable Greek allies.

Achaean aid

Ever thankful for Rome’s recent intervention against the Macedonians, one such ally was the Achaean League. Sending a small force under the command of Diophanes – a disciple of their most famous commander Philopoemen – these Achaeans had already proven their formidable skill in the preceding fighting.

For Scipio, these men were undoubtedly a great addition. Yet Diophanes and his Achaeans were not the only Greeks siding with the Romans. One other had staked everything on a Roman victory.

Eumenes II

That man was Eumenes II, ruler of the Attalid dynasty, a small Hellenistic kingdom in Western Anatolia. Bringing his army to Magnesia, that man was determined to expel Antiochus from Asia Minor and the ever-present threat the Seleucid expansion had posed to his kingdom. His role in the upcoming battle would be critical.

The Seleucid army

Boasting one of the most diverse Hellenistic armies ever seen, Antiochus’ army could not have been more different to that of his Roman counterpart. From Syrian scythed chariots and Gallic cavalry from Asia Minor to Arabian camel riders and swift horse archers from Turkmenistan, his army had come from all four corners of his vast empire.

Yet despite this diversity, Antiochus’ force still focused around the most iconic unit of the entire Hellenistic period.

The phalanx

From fighting in the hill fortresses of Thrace to the plains of Southern Italy and the fast-flowing Hydaspes River in India, the Macedonian phalanx had formed the backbone of Hellenistic armies across the Ancient World for the past 130 years. Antiochus’ force was no different.

Having 16, 000 of these troops – including an elite force of Argyraspides – at Magnesia, Antiochus knew their role in the upcoming battle would be crucial, pinning their Roman opponents in place with multiple rows of deadly pikes. Yet albeit critical, the phalanx could not win the battle alone.

Elephants

To aid his powerful infantry, Antiochus positioned nearby one of his most deadly weapons: A small force of Indian War Elephants, the tanks of ancient warfare.

Having maintained good relations with the powerful Mauryan Empire ever since Seleucus I’s treaty with the famed Chandragupta over a century before, Indian elephants had become a frequent part of Seleucid armies. Yet using these beasts also had its risks. If managed effectively, then their impact on a battle’s outcome could easily decide the engagement. If not, calamity could be just as likely.

Deployment

Drawing up his forces, Antiochus deployed his powerful war elephants at regular intervals between each section of his phalanx. Appian, writing over 350 years later, claims the sight from the Roman camp,

The appearance of the phalanx was like that of a wall, of which the elephants were the towers. Such was the arrangement of the infantry of Antiochus.

{App. Syr. 6.32}

Imagine you are facing one of the most powerful armies of our time. Not only is their infantry highly-trained in a tested form of fighting and equipped with the best weapons available, but divided regularly among these soldiers are some of the most feared tanks in warfare, both stronger and more terrifying than any you or your army have faced before.

For a Roman soldier at Magnesia, viewing Antiochus’ phalanx intermingled with the formidable Indian elephants would have been the ancient equivalent of such a sight. The prospect of having to combat such a formation would have looked daunting from a distance. Yet looks, as will be proven, could be deceiving.

The time for admiration was over. Wanting no more delay, battle quickly commenced.

The Battle of Magnesia 190 BC

At first, all seemed to be going well for Antiochus. Commanding the right side of his army himself, he successfully managed to drive back the opposing Romans. So far so good. Yet elsewhere, things were not going as smoothly.

On Antiochus’ left, things quickly turned to disaster. There, intending to put the opposing Roman forces into complete disarray, Antiochus had deployed many of his deadly scythed chariots to lead the charge. Their shock impact, Antiochus and his commanders likely envisaged, would allow their forces to swiftly cut down any remaining resistance at leisure. In practice, the strategy was sound enough. Yet things did not go according to plan.

Chariot calamity

Eumenes, commanding the opposing Roman flank and seeing this impending chariot attack, acted decisively. Gathering his missile-troops the Attalid King rained stones, lead and arrows on the bladed carts, hailing down death and destruction from a distance. The result would prove devastating.

Suffering heavily and refusing to continue being slaughtered from this barrage of missiles, the Seleucid chariots soon became uncontrollable. Turning away from their assailants, they sought safety by any means and charged manically back towards the rest of Antiochus’ flank. Calamity was about to ensue.

Running amok, these bladed wagons of destruction carved devastating gaps through Antiochus’ heavily-armoured mounted troops – the cavalry’s armour making it almost impossible for them to avoid the deadly scythes. Antiochus’ weapon had backfired completely; rather than the Romans, it was his army that now felt the full force of these brutal war machines. In complete confusion and disarray, the Seleucid left was in turmoil.

The critical moment

From this confusion, one man saw an opportunity that would decide the encounter. Appian recalls,

Eumenes, having succeeded (in pushing back the chariots)… led his own horse and those of the Romans and Italians… against the Galatians, the Cappadocians, and the other collection of mercenaries opposed to him… They… made so heavy a charge that they put to flight not only those, but the adjoining squadrons and the mail-clad horse.

{App. Syr. 6.34}

In this one swift, deadly charge, Antiochus’ vast array of powerful cavalry on his right flank evaporated. Eumenes had seen the opportunity; he had been swift to take it.

Exposed

Defeat would follow quickly for Antiochus and his army.

The man himself – caught up in the thrill of a cavalry chase – was blissfully unaware of the calamity. His powerful elephants too, unable to move away from the Seleucid phalanx without causing great disruption, were rendered all-but useless.

As both flanks crumbled around them, Antiochus’ formidable pikemen found themselves completely exposed. Under attack from all sides, their worst nightmare had come true. No longer were these men fighting for Antiochus; now they were battling purely for their own survival.

Encircled, Antiochus’ formidable phalanx prepared a valiant last stand. Forming a square, they protruded their pikes in every direction – presenting any attacking Roman with a wall of death.

Finally, however, succumbing to Roman missiles and the panicking of their own elephants nearby, the resistance crumbled. Rome had won.

Antiochus, expecting to return to a victorious Seleucid army, was shocked. Arriving back at the battlefield to see his great army either routed or slain, the King quickly fled. He had played his last card and lost.

The result

With the destruction of his great force at Magnesia, so too did Antiochus’ hopes of extending his empire into Europe. He could not complain. That King’s war against the Romans had been plagued by tactical errors from start to finish. Magnesia was simply a culmination of such mistakes.

Abandoning his dreams to reform Seleucus’ great Empire, Antiochus admitted defeat and sued for peace.

The Treaty of Apamea: 188 BC

Bathing in the glory of victory at Magnesia, the Scipios would be sure to impose harsh terms on their defeated enemy; never again would they allow Antiochus or his empire to expand westwards. Determined to reduce his power in the Mediterranean, they forced Antiochus to give up almost all his holdings in Anatolia. Yet that was not all.

Having now witnessed first-hand the extent of Antiochus’ available manpower at Magnesia, Rome desired to reduce his military strength even further.

Not only did they strip Antiochus almost completely of his navy, but they also forced him to disband every contingent of his Indian War Elephants. One of the most iconic units of Seleucid armouries for the past century was no more.

Never again would Antiochus or his empire be a threat to Rome; this treaty had mercilessly seen to that. At the outbreak of war, there had been two great superpowers in the Mediterranean. Now, there was only one.

Mare Nostrum

Having implemented these terms on the defeated Antiochus, Roman confidence went through the roof. They had emerged victorious over a general who had styled his previous conquests on those of the famed Alexander; who could now seriously challenge Roman dominance throughout the Mediterranean? From then onward, Rome had every right to call that sea Mare Nostrum (‘Our Sea’).

Yet Rome was not the only power to benefit from victory at Magnesia. Throughout the campaign their Greek allies had proved invaluable. Their aid would not be forgotten.

Rewards

Philip V of Macedon, the Rhodians and the Greek Cities in Asia Minor that had sided with Rome at Magnesia; all were rewarded for their loyalty and assistance against Antiochus. One man and his dynasty however, benefited more than any other from this Roman generosity.

Attalid supremacy

That was Eumenes, the Attalid dynast and hero of Magnesia. Not wanting to control these far-flung lands themselves, Rome granted Eumenes all Antiochus’ former territories in Asia Minor north of the River Maeander.

In one battle, a formerly small Hellenistic power in Western Asia Minor had been transformed into the most powerful force in that entire region. The Golden Age of Attalid rule had begun.

The fate of the Seleucids

As for Antiochus, his fate would be less fortunate. Within a year of Apamea, that Seleucid King met his inevitable end. Desperate for more money to fund a new campaign, he was killed in Susa whilst raiding a temple – a somewhat anticlimactic end to the story of this great king.

In his lifetime, he had restored the Seleucid Kingdom into the most powerful nation in Asia; sadly however, his war with Rome had proven one step too far.

Although one other king would temporarily succeed in reversing its demise, within 23 years of Antiochus’ passing Seleucid power had descended into internal turmoil; a turmoil that it never managed to completely emerge from again.

Eventually – and perhaps fittingly – it would be Rome that put the final nail in that nation’s coffin, annexing their few remaining lands in Ancient Syria into their Empire in 63 BC. One of Alexander’s greatest legacies had finally come to an end.

What if

As with many battles of the time, Magnesia was decided by the initiative of one man seizing an opportunity; it was the quick-thinking of Eumenes that ultimately paved the way for the Roman victory.

Imagine therefore how different antiquity would look if Antiochus’ army had managed to fend off that Greek king’s devastating charge? One unit more than any other in Antiochus’ vast force would have been well-suited for completing this task.

Elephants & horses

Although a fearsome task for any enemy to deal with, these tanks of ancient warfare were especially deadly against cavalry. Not only did their smell panic nearby horses, but their size and power ensured that just a single beast could rip straight through even the most disciplined of mounted formations.

Indeed, Antiochus above all others should have known this fact – his forefather Seleucus had adopted a very similar tactic against one of his greatest foes over a century before.

Rather than deploying the elephants among his infantry – where they ended up just as much of a hazard for Antiochus’ army than the Romans – imagine if Antiochus and his commanders had placed them in reserve?

Deployed there, they would have been easily manoeuvrable and ready to deal with any unforeseen threat; in such a position, these animals would have been ideally situated to counter Eumenes’ devastating attack on the left. If so, then the battle’s outcome may have looked very different.

Repulsing Eumenes

Instead of being the architect of the critical blow, in such a world Eumenes would have found his cavalry charge completely rebuffed – his troops finding their mounts unwilling to run straight into the terrifying Indian elephants.

Eumenes’ intent to seize the initiative would have backfired completely. Rather than fleeing, Antiochus’ left flank therefore, would have remained intact, emerging victorious.

The impact of this would have been far-reaching. Antiochus’ phalanx, safe in the knowledge that both their flanks had successfully repulsed their opponent, would have had no need to form their desperate last stand.

Although no-one can say for sure what would happen next, perhaps the Roman army, finding itself defeated on both wings and held by the phalanx in the centre, would have been the ones to become surrounded instead?

It’s destruction could have easily followed in such a scenario; the consequences of which are fascinating to consider.

Rome in retreat

Rather than instantly fleeing, Antiochus would have returned to cheering troops and a victorious army; his Roman counterparts either lying dead or fleeing back towards Europe.

From fighting at Thermopylae to allowing the Romans to cross unhindered in Asia, Antiochus’ campaign against Rome up to that point had been one of several great military blunders. Victory at Magnesia, however, could have easily turned it all around.

In such a world, despite multiple early successes against Antiochus, Rome’s first ever campaign into Asia would have therefore ended in disaster – hardly the best of omens for future eastern expansion.

To many Romans, perhaps this would have affirmed their fears that Asia was a step too far for their fledgling empire… for now. Crossing back into Europe, for one of their allies more than most would this have been catastrophic news.

Attalid decline

For Eumenes and his kingdom, both would likely have met their end soon after suffering defeat at Magnesia. Cementing his rule on Asia Minor, no longer would Antiochus have allowed Pergamum to remain a beacon for Seleucid resistance in that region.

The Great Altar of Zeus and the Library of Pergamum; two brilliant pieces of monumental architecture that turned Pergamum into one of the greatest Greek cities in the East. Their constructions, however, were entwined with Eumenes and the Attalid ‘Golden Age’ that followed victory at Magnesia.

If not for that victory, then these two iconic creations in the subsequent Attalid supremacy would never have occurred. There would have been no Attalid ‘Golden Age,’ no Attalid supremacy in Asia Minor. A victorious Antiochus would have ruthlessly seen to that.

Rather than Antiochus and his Seleucid Empire, it would have been Eumenes and his Attalid rule that quickly fell into obscurity after the battle.

A bi-polar Mediterranean

Re-affirming his control on Asia Minor, Antiochus’ great empire would have remained powerful on the doorstep of Europe. Rome’s nightmare outcome of the war would have come true.

Such co-existence between these two expansionist powers, however, would never have lasted. As proven with previous bi-polar scenarios – such as that of Sparta and Athens back in 431 BC – war between them would have again erupted soon enough. Its outcome, however, would be anyone’s guess. All possible in a world where Magnesia had not marked the end for Seleucid primacy in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Conclusion

The Roman victory at Magnesia marked its first ever foray into Asia. From then on, the Hellenistic Kingdoms were no longer the clear top power in the Mediterranean; now that title would belong to Rome.

Yet if it had not been for Antiochus’ poor deployment of his elephants – unable to prevent the crushing charge of Eumenes – then it seems very likely that the outcome of Magnesia would have been very different. The repercussions of such are fascinating to consider.

For how long would the Seleucid Empire and Rome co-exist in such a bi-polar Mediterranean World? Would Rome have halted their Eastern expansion indefinitely or would defeat at Magnesia have simply been a minor setback? And of course, what of Hannibal?

Would his hand in the Roman defeat at Magnesia have emboldened him and other past enemies to rise-up and defy Rome once more? All fascinating questions in a world where Antiochus’ formidable elephants had saved his army from ruin.

Enjoy the article? Please share or leave a like – it’s only one click!

Keep updated on new articles by subscribing below.

Better still please leave a comment telling me what you thought.

Huge thanks to Johnny Shumate for letting us use some of his brilliant images. You can also view his page here.

Posters of Johnny Shumate’s fantastic artwork can be bought on his Etsy page here.

Further Reading

Appian’s Syrian Wars here.

Livy’s account of the Roman War against Antiochus (Book 37) here.

Baronowski, D. W. 1991. ‘The Status of the Greek Cities in Asia Minor after 190 B.C,’ Hermes 119 (4), 450-463.

Callaghan, P. J. 1981, ‘On the Date of the Great Altar of Zeus at Pergamon.’ Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 28, 115-121

Errington, R. M. 1989, ‘Rome against Philip and Antiochus,’ The Cambridge Ancient History 8, 244-298.

Habicht, C. 1989, ‘The Seleucids and their Rivals,’ The Cambridge Ancient History 8, 324-387

Tarn, W. W. 1966. The Greeks in Bactria and India, Cambridge University Press.

Author: Tristan Hughes Twitter Facebook

Did you enjoy this article? Signup today and receive free updates straight in your inbox. We will never share or sell your email address. I agree to have my personal information transfered to MailChimp ( I agree to have my personal information transfered to MailChimp ( more information

Share this: Tweet





WhatsApp



Like this: Like Loading...