Would it be the case that different cities would support different dynasts? Or would it all be handled behind closed doors more than on the field of battle? I imagine these dynastic struggles were feuds that took place mainly at the highest levels and the common man was not much involved. Of course for the first release, this would just be a good name for a new rebel faction there.Sounds very interesting, he was deposed in 107BC right? I suppose that leaves the question of do we go with Ptolemy IX or X as the faction leader? Both could present exciting challenges if their kingdom starts divided. since Ptolemy IX was formally distinguished as 'Lathyros,' a good name for this independent kingdom would simply be the Lathyrosian Kingdom, in keeping with the presumed idea of dynastic rule - again presuming that he would be set up as irreconciled with the Alexandrian backed Ptolemies in Egypt. Please if you can, a short chronology of the Ptolemaic dynasty since 166 bce the confusion.Īs an aside regarding my notes there on the independent Ptolemaic kingdom in Cyprus and Cyrenaica. Apparently he also emplyed a good many mercenary pirates in his navy, and some of the peoples of Southern Asia Minor in a small local force on Cyprus, which he successfully fortified and defended several times. He sent 6,000 Cypriot levies to aid one of the feuding Seleucid dynasts, and actually maintained the loyalty of Cyrenaica throughout his time on Cyprus. Some other more interesting specifics that I referenced in one of the Ptolemaic histories I have, is that he actually became powerful while still ruling this independent kingdom. Of course for the first release, this would just be a good name for a new rebel faction there. As an aside regarding my notes there on the independent Ptolemaic kingdom in Cyprus and Cyrenaica.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |