The Provinces of the Roman Empire 51

The Provinces of the Roman Empire 51

This holds true even in some measure for the chronology. The

official historiography of the Sassanids reduces the space between the

last Darius and the first Sassanid from 558 to 266 years (Nöldeke,

_Tabari_, p. 1).

 

[3] The viceroys of Persis are called in their title constantly “Zag

Alohin” (at least the Aramaean signs correspond to these words, which

were presumably in pronunciation expressed in the Persian way), son

of God (Mordtmann, _Zeitschrift für Numismatik_, iv. 155 f.), and

to this corresponds the title θεοπάτωρ on the Greek coins of the

great-kings. The designation “God” is also found, as with the Seleucids

and the Sassanids.--Why a double diadem is attributed to the Arsacids

(Herodian, vi. 2, 1) is not cleared up.

 

[4] Τῶν Παρθυαίων συνέδριόν φησιν (Ποσειδώνιος) εἶναι, says Strabo, xi.

9, 3, p. 515, διττόν, τὸ μὲν συγγενῶν, τὸ δὲ σοφῶν καὶ μάγων, ἐξ ὧν

ἀμφοῖν τοὺς βασιλεῖς καθίστασθαι (καθίστησιν in MSS.); Justinus, xvii.

3, 1, _Mithridates rex Parthorum ... propter crudelitatem a senatu

Parthico regno pellitur_.

 

[5] In Egypt, whose court ceremonial, as doubtless that of all the

states of the Diadochi, is based on that ordained by Alexander, and in

so far upon that of the Persian empire, the like title seems to have

been conferred also personally (Franz, _C. I. Gr._ iii. 270). That the

same occurred with the Arsacids, is possible. Among the Greek-speaking

subjects of the Arsacid state the appellation μεγιστᾶνες seems in the

original stricter use to denote the members of the seven houses; it

is worthy of notice that _megistanes_ and _satrapae_ are associated

(Seneca, _Ep._ 21; Josephus, _Arch._ xi. 3, 2; xx. 2, 3). The

circumstance that in court mourning the Persian king does not invite

the _megistanes_ to table (Suetonius, _Gai._ 5) suggests the conjecture

that they had the privilege of taking meals with him. The title τῶν

πρώτων φίλων is also found among the Arsacids just as at the Egyptian

and Pontic courts (_Bull. de corr. Hell._ vii. p. 349).

 

[6] A royal cup-bearer, who is at the same time general, is mentioned

in Josephus, _Arch._ xiv. 13, 7 = _Bell. Jud._ i. 13, 1. Similar court

offices are of frequent occurrence in the states of the Diadochi.

 

[7] Tacitus, _Ann._ xv. 2, 31. If, according to the preface of

Agathangelos (p. 109, Langlois), at the time of the Arsacids the oldest

and ablest prince bore rule over the country, and the three standing

next to him were kings of the Armenians, of the Indians, and of the

Massagetae, there is here perhaps at bottom the same arrangement. That

the Partho-Indian empire, if it was combined with the main land, was

likewise regarded as an appanage for the second son, is very probable.

 

[8] These are doubtless meant by Justinus (xli. 2, 2), _proximus

maiestati regum praepositorum ordo est; ex hoc duces in bello, ex hoc

in pace rectores habent_. The native name is preserved by the gloss in

Hesychius, βίσταξ ὁ βασιλεὺς παρὰ Πέρσαις. If in Ammianus, xxiii. 6,

14, the presidents of the Persian _regiones_ are called _vitaxae_ (read

_vistaxae_), _id est magistri equitum et reges et satrapae_, he has

awkwardly referred what is Persian to all Inner Asia (comp. _Hermes_,

xvi. 613); we may add that the designation “leaders of horsemen”

for these viceroys may relate to the fact that they, like the Roman

governors, united in themselves the highest civil and the supreme

military power, and the army of the Parthians consisted preponderantly

of cavalry.

 

[9] This we learn from the title σατράπης τῶν σατραπῶν, attributed to

one Gotarzes in the inscription of Kermanschahân in Kurdistan (_C.

I. Gr._ 4674). It cannot be assigned to the Arsacid king of the same

name as such; but perhaps there may be designated by it, as Olshausen

(_Monatsbericht der Berliner Akademie_, 1878, p. 179) conjectures,

that position which belonged to him after his renouncing of the

great-kingdom (Tacitus, _Ann._ xi. 9).

 

[10] Still later a troop of horse in the Parthian army is called that

“of the free:” Josephus, _Arch._ xiv. 13, 5 = _Bell. Jud._ i. 13, 3.

 

[11] The oldest known coin with Pahlavi writing was struck in

Claudius’s time under Vologasus I.; it is bilingual, and gives to the

king in Greek his full title, but only the name Arsaces, in Iranian

merely the native individual name shortened (_Vol._).

 

[12] Usually this is restricted to the large silver money, and the

small silver and most of the copper are regarded as of royal coinage.

But by this view a singular secondary part in coinage is assigned to

the great-king. More correctly perhaps the former coinage is conceived

of as predominantly destined for dealings abroad, the latter as

predominantly for internal intercourse; the diversities subsisting

between the two kinds are also explained in this way.

 

[13] The first ruler that bears it is Phraapates about 188 B.C. (Percy

Gardner, _Parthian Coinage_, p. 27).

 

[14] Thus there stands on the coins of Gotarzes (under Claudius)

Γωτέρζης βασιλεὺς βασιλέων ὑὸς κεκαλουμένος Ἀρταβάνου. On the later

ones the Greek legend is often quite unintelligible.

 

[15] While the kingdom of Darius, according to his inscriptions,

includes in it the Gādara (the Gandhâra of the Indians, Γανδαρῖτις

of the Greeks on the Cabul river) and the Hîdu (the dwellers by the

Indus), the former are in one of the inscriptions of Asoka adduced

among his subjects, and a copy of his great edict has been found in

Kapurdi Giri, or rather in Shahbaz Garhi (Yusufzai-district), nearly

27 miles north-west of the point where the Cabul river falls into

the Indus at Attock. The seat of the government of these north-west

provinces of Asoka’s kingdom was (according to the inscription _C.

I. Indicar._ i. p. 91) Takkhasilâ, Τάξιλα of the Greeks, some 40

miles E.S.E. of Attock, the seat of government for the south-western

provinces was Ujjênî (Ὀζήνη). The eastern part of the Cabul valley thus

belonged at any rate to Asoka’s empire. It is not quite impossible

that the Khyber pass formed the boundary; but probably the whole Cabul

valley belonged to India, and the boundary to the south of Cabul was

formed by the sharp line of the Suleiman range, and farther to the

south-west by the Bolan pass. Of the later Indo-Scythian king Huvishka

(Ooerke of the coins), who seems to have resided on the Yamunâ in

Mathurâ, an inscription has been found at Wardak not far northward from

Cabul (according to information from Oldenberg).

 

[16] The Egyptian merchant named in note 3 makes mention, c. 47, of

“the warlike people of the Bactrians, who have their own king.” At

that time, therefore, Bactria was separated from the Indus-empire that

was under Parthian princes. Strabo, too (xi. 11, 1, p. 516) treats the

Bactro-Indian empire as belonging to the past.

 

[17] Probably he is the Kaspar--in older tradition Gathaspar--who

appears among the holy three kings from the East (Gutschmid, _Rhein.

Mus._ xix. 162).

 

[18] The most definite testimony to the Parthian rule in these regions

is found in the description of the coasts of the Red Sea drawn up by

an Egyptian merchant under Vespasian, c. 38: “Behind the mouth of the

Indus in the interior lies the capital of Scythia Minnagara; but this

is ruled by the Parthians, who constantly chase away one another”

(ὑπὸ Πάρθων συνεχῶς ἀλλήλους ἐνδιωκόντων). The same is repeated in a

somewhat confused way, c. 41; it might here appear as if Minnagara lay

in India itself above Barygaza, and Ptolemy has already been led astray

by this; but certainly the writer, who speaks as to the interior only

from hearsay, has only wished to say that a large town Minnagara lay

inland not far from Barygaza, and much cotton was brought thence to

Barygaza. The numerous traces also of Alexander, which occur according

to the same authority in Minnagara, can be found only on the Indus,

not in Gujerat. The position of Minnagara on the lower Indus not far

from Hyderabad, and the existence of a Parthian rule there under

Vespasian, appear hereby assured.--With this we may be allowed to

combine the coins of king Gondopharus or Hyndopherres, who in a very

old Christian legend is converted to Christianity by St. Thomas, the

apostle of the Parthians and Indians, and in fact appears to belong

to the first period of the Roman empire (Sallet, _Num. Zeitschr._ vi.

355; Gutschmid, _Rhein. Mus._ xix. 162); of his brother’s son Abdagases

(Sallet, _ib._ p. 365), who may be identical with the Parthian prince

of this name in Tacitus, _Ann._ vi. 36, at any rate bears a Parthian

name; and lastly of king Sanabarus, who must have reigned shortly after

Hyndopherres, perhaps was his successor. Here belongs also a number

of other coins marked with Parthian names, Arsaces, Pacorus, Vonones.

This coinage attaches itself decidedly to that of the Arsacids (Sallet,

_ib._ p. 277); the silver pieces of Gondopharus and of Sanabarus--of

the others the coins are almost solely copper--correspond exactly to

the Arsacid drachmae. To all appearance these belong to the Parthian

princes of Minnagara; the appearance here of Indian legend alongside of

the Greek, as of Pahlavi writing among the late Arsacids, suits this

view. These, however, are not coins of satraps, but, as the Egyptian

indicates, of great-kings rivalling those of Ctesiphon; Hyndopherres

names himself in very corrupt Greek βασιλεὺς βασιλέων μέγας ἀυτόκρατωρ,

and in good Indian “Maharajah Rajadi Rajah.” If, as is not improbable,

under the Mambaros or Akabaros, whom the Periplus, c. 41, 52,

designates as ruler of the coast of Barygaza, there lurks the Sanabarus

of the coins, the latter belongs to the time of Nero or Vespasian, and

ruled not merely at the mouths of the Indus, but also over Gujerat.

Moreover, if an inscription found not far from Peshawur is rightly

referred to king Gondopharus, his rule must have extended up thither,

probably as far as Cabul.--The fact that Corbulo in the year 60 sent

the embassy of the Hyrcanians who had revolted from the Parthians--in

order that they might not be intercepted by the latter--to the coast of

the Red Sea, whence they might reach their home without setting foot

on Parthian territory (Tacitus, _Ann._ xv. 25), tells in favour of the

view that the Indus valley at that time was not subject to the ruler of

Ctesiphon.

 

[19] That the great kingdom of the Arsacids of Minnagara did not

subsist much beyond the time of Nero, is probable from the coins.

It is questionable what rulers followed them. The Bactro-Indian

rulers of Greek names belong predominantly, perhaps all of them, to

the pre-Augustan epoch; and various indigenous names, _e.g._ Maues

and Azes, fall in point of language and writing (_e.g._ the form of

the ω Ω) before this time. On the other hand the coins of the kings

Kozulokadphises and Oemokadphises, and those of the Sacian kings,

Kanerku and his successors, while all are clearly characterised as

belonging to one coinage by the gold stater of the weight of the Roman

aureus, which does not previously occur in the Indian coinage, are

to all appearance later than Gondopharus and Sanabarus. They show

how the state of the Indus valley assumed a national Indian type in

ever increasing measure in contrast to the Hellenes as well as to the

Iranians. The reign of these Kadphises will thus fall between the

Indo-Parthian rulers and the dynasty of the Sacae, which latter begins

with A.D. 78 (Oldenberg, in Sallet’s _Zeitschr. für Num._ viii. 292).

Coins of these Sacian kings, found in the treasure of Peshawur, name

in a remarkable way Greek gods in a mutilated form, Ηρακιλο, Σαραπο,

alongside of the national Βουδο. The latest of their coins show the

influence of the oldest Sassanid coinage, and might belong to the

second half of the third century (Sallet, _Zeitschr. für Num._ vi. 224).

 

[20] The Indo-Greek and the Indo-Parthian rulers, just as the

Kadphises, make use on their coins to a large extent of the indigenous

Indian language and writing alongside of the Greek: the Sacian kings

on the other hand never used the Indian language and Indian alphabet,

but employ exclusively the Greek letters, and the non-Greek legends of

their coins are beyond doubt Scythian. Thus on Kanerku’s gold pieces

there sometimes stands βασιλεὺς βασιλέων Κανήρκου, sometimes ραο

νανοραο κανηρκι κορανο, where the first two words must be a Scythian

form of the Indian Rajâdi Rajah, and the two following contain the

personal and the family name (Gushana) of the king (Oldenberg, _l. c._

p. 294). Thus these Sacae were foreign rulers in India in another sense

than the Bactrian Hellenes and the Parthians. Yet the inscriptions set

up under them in India are not Scythian but Indian.

 

[21] Arrian, who, as governor of Cappadocia, had himself wielded

command over the Armenians (_contra Al._ 29), always in the _Tactica_

names the Armenians and Parthians together (4, 3, 44, 1, as respects

the heavy cavalry, the mailed κοντοφόροι and the light cavalry, the

ἀκροβολισταί or ἱπποτοξόται; 34, 7 as respects the wide hose); and,

where he speaks of Hadrian’s introduction of barbaric cavalry into the

Roman army, he traces the mounted archers back to the model of “the

Parthians or Armenians” (44, 1).

 

[22] Caesar’s illegitimate son Πτολεμαῖος ὁ καὶ Καῖσαρ θεὸς φιλοπάτωρ

φιλομήτωρ, as his royal designation runs (_C. I. Gr. 4717_), entered

on the joint rule of Egypt in the Egyptian year 29 Aug. 711/2, as the

era shows (Wescher, _Bullet. dell’ Inst._ 1866, p. 199; Krall, _Wiener

Studien_, v. 313). As he came in place of Ptolemaeus the younger, the

husband and brother of his mother, the setting aside of the latter by

Cleopatra, of which the particulars are not known, must have taken

place just then, and have furnished the occasion to proclaim him as

king of Egypt. Dio also, xlvii. 31, places his nomination in the summer

of 712 {42 B.C.} before the battle of Philippi. It was thus not the

work of Antonius, but sanctioned by the two rulers in concert at a time

when it could not but be their object to meet the wishes of the queen

of Egypt, who certainly had from the outset ranged herself on their side.