# A Political History of Parthia/Chapter 7

CHAPTER VII
THE CONTEST FOR THE EUPHRATES
THE standards and captives taken from the armies of Crassus and Antony had been returned to Rome; faced with discord within her own domains, Parthia yielded them without a struggle. Shortly after their surrender in 20 b.c., Augustus sent as a present to Phraates, the Parthian king, an Italian slave girl named Musa. Whether she was placed in a strategic position as a source of information or with the hope that she might influence the king, we have no means of knowing. By Musa Phraates had a son, also named Phraates (V), better known by the diminutive Phraataces. After the birth of this male heir to the throne, the status of Musa was raised from that of concubine to queen.
When about 10 b.c. Phraataces attained sufficient age to become a candidate for the succession to the throne, Musa persuaded her husband to send his older children to Rome and thus to leave the field clear for her own son. Phraates invited M. Titius, ​then governor of Syria, to a conference and turned over to him his sons Seraspadanes, Phraates, Rhodaspes, and Vonones, as well as two of their wives and four of their sons. Throughout their residence at Rome these princes were treated with all respect due their rank, and one of them, Phraates, built a temple at Nemi, dedicated perhaps to the goddess Isis.
"Who fears the Parthian … while Augustus lives?" boldly sang Horace about this time, but others of his poems both earlier and later betray a lively interest in the East not unmixed with that emotion. In Parthia itself the surrender of the standards aroused further animosity against Phraates and provided additional fuel for the discontent already present. Josephus mentions a Parthian king named Mithradates who was in power sometime between 12 and 9 b.c. and who must represent some opposition of which all other record is lost.
​Strong central government in Parthia was a thing of the past, and for some years to come the empire remained in a state of turmoil. Under such conditions party, racial, and religious strife found ample opportunity to develop. The Parthians had long enjoyed friendly relations with the Jews both within and without their political domain. The return of Hyrcanus from Parthia to Jerusalem in 37 b.c. is but the last demonstration of this entente cordiale. The breakdown of royal power brought a change in the situation. Sometime not long before 6 b.c. a Babylonian Jew, Zamaris, fled with one hundred of his relatives and five hundred of his armed cavalry to Antioch, where he sought refuge with C. Sentius Saturninus, then governor of Syria. Such a man was no city merchant but a rich and powerful landowner, one of the feudal nobility who lived on vast estates out­ side of the city areas. Indeed, many other Babylonian Jews, like Zamaris, were agriculturists, not merchants, even as they were in the time when Babylon flourished. Only some desperate situation could force a man who could raise five hundred armed retainers to flee from his homeland; perhaps Zamaris had espoused the cause of the Mithradates mentioned by Josephus. Saturninus gave him land at Ulatha near Daphne; but Herod offered a tract in Batanaea ​with special privileges, including freedom from taxation.
About the end of the century events occurred in Armenia which led again to Roman intervention. As we have seen (p. 141), the expedition led by Tiberius in 20 b.c. arrived too late to be of great service, for the death of Artaxes permitted the installation of his brother Tigranes II without difficulty. When not long before 6 b.c. Tigranes died, the nationalist party placed on the throne Tigranes (III) and Erato, his sister-wife, the children of the dead king. To insure the investiture of a candidate satisfactory to Rome, Tiberius was commissioned to leave for Armenia. But Tiberius lingered at Rhodes. Eventually Augustus ordered that a certain Artavasdes II, perhaps a brother of Tigranes II, be installed as ruler of Armenia. Tigranes and Erato must have been deposed, and Artavasdes reigned a short time.
​In 2 b.c. Musa took the final step to secure for her son Phraataces the throne of Parthia; Phraates, now an old man, was poisoned. Artavasdes, established by Roman aid on the Armenian throne, was looked upon with disfavor by many of his subjects and certainly by the Parthians. A coalition of these two groups drove him from the throne about 1 b.c., and Tigranes and his sister-wife again secured control. If Rome was to maintain her sphere of influence in Armenia and her prestige in the Near East, immediate action was imperative. At the moment Augustus had few whom he could trust to cope with this new development. His grandson Gaius was put in command of the forces sent to restore Roman authority. Someone, perhaps Isidore of Charax, was commissioned to secure information about the East—a definite indication that the government was awakening to the inadequacy of the Roman military intelligence service.
When the news of the advance of Gaius reached Parthia, Phraataces sent an embassy to Augustus ​to explain matters and to request the return of his brothers. The Roman reply was addressed baldly to "Phraataces" and directed that he lay aside the title of king and withdraw from Armenia. The Parthian answered with equal rudeness. Alarmed by the turn affairs had taken, Tigranes of Armenia attempted to make peace with Augustus and was sent to Gaius with a promise of favorable action. Not long after this Tigranes died fighting some barbarians, perhaps on the northern frontier, and Erato abdicated.
When Gaius reached the Euphrates, Phraataces, now thoroughly aroused by active intervention on the part of Rome, held an interview with him on an island, while the armies were drawn up on opposite banks. Later the two dined, first on the Roman side and then on the Parthian, pledging their good faith thus in typical eastern fashion. One of the officers, Velleius Paterculus, a youthful tribune with Gaius, aptly describes Phraataces as an excellent youth. The terms arranged appear to have favored the Romans, for it was agreed that the Parthians should drop all claim to Armenia and that the four Parthian princes should stay in Rome.
In a.d. 2 Phraataces and Musa his mother were ​married. This act, which horrified the Greeks and Romans, suggests a possible connection with the changes which Zoroastrianism was then undergoing. Customs long confined solely to the Magi were being adopted at this time by the people as a whole; thus burial in rock tombs was abandoned for exposure and the collection of the bones in small rock cuttings. Next-of-kin marriages had been common among the Magi.
After his interview with Phraataces Gaius advanced northward into Armenia, where he placed Ariobarzanes, son of Artabazus, king of the Medes, on the throne. Revolt against this new Roman appointee was soon in full swing, and Gaius began military operations to suppress it. In due course he attacked the stronghold of Artagira, which was defended by Addon, perhaps the satrap set over the ​territory by the Parthian king. On September 9, a.d. 3, in the course of a parley in which Addon was to reveal the whereabouts of a treasure hoard of the Parthian ruler, he wounded the young Roman commander, and, although the city was taken by the Romans, Gaius died from the effects of his wound the next year. Augustus could boast that all Armenia had been subdued, and poets commemorated the return of Gaius. There are some indications that this Armenian campaign was but the preliminary to an attack on the Parthians. Gaius is said to have died in the midst of preparations for a Parthian war, and Augustus is reported to have contemplated expanding the boundary of the Empire beyond the Euphrates.
Ariobarzanes, installed as king of Armenia by Gaius, soon died, and his place was taken by his son, Artavasdes III. Phraataces did not remain long ​in power after his marriage to his mother, an act which his subjects did not approve. In a.d. 4 he was either killed or driven into Syria, where he died shortly afterward. The nobles called in a prince of the Arsacid family named Orodes (III), whose violent temper and great cruelty made him intolerable. Another insurrection followed, and Orodes was murdered at a festival or while hunting about a.d. 6.
Ambassadors were then dispatched to Rome, whence they were sent to Tiberius, who was probably in Germany. They requested the return of one of the sons of Phraates IV; and Vonones, the eldest, was sent. The Parthians were not long satisfied, for they were irked by the western manners and friends their new sovereign had acquired at Rome. ​His dislike of the hunt and of traditional feasts, his free and open manners, his failure to show interest in horses—all these things caused the nationalists to call in another Arsacid, Artabanus III. He was king of Atropatene, but had connections on one side of his family with the Dahae. On his first attempt to secure the throne, in a.d. 9/10, Artabanus was badly defeated and forced to retreat to the mountain fastnesses of his own kingdom. Vonones hastened to restrike the old tetradrachms of Musa and Phraataces with a design symbolic of his success, a winged Victory bearing a palm branch, and then to strike drachms in a similar style with the legend ΒΑϹΙΛΕΥϹ ΟΝΟƜΝΗϹ ΝΕΙΚΗϹΑϹ ΑΡΤΑΒΑΝΟΝ. But his triumph was short-lived, for Artabanus collected a second army and returned to the attack. This time Vonones was defeated and forced to flee to Seleucia on the Tigris. Artabanus followed, and many of his opponents were slain. The victor entered Ctesiphon and was proclaimed king about a.d. 12. Vonones escaped from Seleucia to Armenia, which was then without a king, for Artavasdes III had been murdered ​and Tigranes (IV), a grandson of King Herod the Great, sent by Augustus to succeed him, had been deposed after a brief reign. Vonones secured the Armenian throne, but owing to pressure from the Parthian king Artabanus he was forced to abdicate in a.d. 15 or 16. He threw himself on the mercy of the governor of Syria, Creticus Silanus, who allowed him to live in Antioch and to retain the pomp and name of king.
Shortly before the abdication of Vonones from the throne of Armenia, in a.d. 14 the aged Augustus died and his adopted son Tiberius succeeded him. When Artabanus of Parthia sent his son Orodes to fill the vacant place, Tiberius felt it incumbent upon himself to take action. In a.d. 18 he sent his adopted son Germanicus with full authority to act as a free agent and with what was felt to be an impressive retinue. Germanicus proceeded to Artaxata, the Armenian capital, where he found that the people were ready to accept Zeno, son of Polemon, king of Pontus, who had grown up among them and adopted their customs and manners. As Zeno was also friendly to the Romans, Germanicus crowned him in the midst of a ​multitude of people who hailed him as king of Armenia under the name Artaxias.
Germanicus then returned to Syria, where an embassy from the Parthian king reached him. The proposal was made that the friendly alliance in effect between their predecessors should be renewed, and Artabanus sent word that he would be willing to come as far as the Euphrates, the traditional meeting-place for Roman and Parthian and the boundary between the two great empires. He requested, however, that Vonones be removed from the neighborhood of the frontier, whence he was fomenting discontent among the Parthians. Germanicus replied with politeness but made no mention of the proposed conference, which apparently never took place. He did transfer Vonones to the coastal city of Pompeiopolis (ancient Soli, near modern Mezitli) in Cilicia. At the same time Germanicus sent Alexander, perhaps a Palmyrene merchant, on a mission to Mesene and to a certain Orabazes. The nature of his message we can only conjecture; but it could hardly involve any direct threat against the Parthians, with relations as amicable as they then were. The embassy suggests ​that the Parthian vassal state of Mesene was by this time more or less independent, which is not surprising in view of the weak central government.
Vonones bribed his guards the next year, a.d. 19, and in the course of a hunt attempted to escape. Halted at the banks of the Pyramus River (Jeihan, Turkish Ceyhan Nehri) by the destruction of a bridge which had been torn up to prevent his escape, he was arrested by Vibius Fronto, prefect of the cavalry. Shortly afterward Vonones was assassinated by Remmius, under whose charge he had been placed in Pompeiopolis. Probably Remmius had been implicated in the escape and feared the revelations which might be made after its failure.
In the same year that Vonones was murdered, Germanicus died, and for the next decade the East remained at peace. Thus between the years 19 and 32 only one governor was sent out to Syria, and even he probably served but a short term. Tiberius was later reproached for thus inviting trouble on the Armenian frontier by leaving that office vacant.
Artabanus at once set about consolidating his position. Josephus tells us at length a story of two Jewish brothers, Anilaeus and Asinaeus, who lived in ​Neharda. They set up a robber kingdom in northern Babylonia, defeated the Parthian satrap, and thus brought themselves to the attention of the Great King. Artabanus handled the situation in a manner much used by present-day mandataries: he sent for the brothers and placed them in formal control of the region which they had ruled as robber barons. This arrangement served admirably for fifteen years, until the death of the brothers just before the revolt of Seleucia. As a consequence of this military inactivity we have little information for the period; one exception is a letter which Artabanus wrote in December, a.d. 21, to the magistrates and the city of Susa, the only royal document of the Arsacid period which has come down to us. The purport of the letter, which was later graven on the stone base of a statue, was to validate a contested city election.
​On the death of Artaxias III (Zeno) of Armenia, Artabanus seized the opportunity thus occasioned to place his eldest son, known to us only as Arsaces, upon the throne. To the aged Tiberius he wrote, claiming the treasure left by Vonones in Syria and Cilicia and threatening to add to his domain all the lands of the Achaemenidae and Seleucidae.
Perhaps it was Artabanus III who brought the Mandaeans from "Madai" to the country of the Two Rivers. The long reign of Artabanus suggests that he was both able and powerful and that he must have restored central authority over the nobles. His diplomatic success in Armenia perhaps caused him to attempt to bring them further under his control, until at last they took action. Two of the most prominent among them, Sinnaces and Abdus, the latter a eunuch, went secretly to Rome, where they reported that if a Parthian prince should appear on the frontier the country would rise to his support. Tiberius chose Phraates, last and youngest son of Phraates IV, now a man of years and a resident of Rome for nearly half a century. But Phraates died suddenly ​fter his arrival in Syria, perhaps from age and the fatigue of travel, or possibly overtaken by the fate which hovers over those who pretend to thrones occupied by such as Artabanus. Artabanus discovered the mission of the two ambassadors to Tiberius, removed Abdus by poison, and kept Sinnaces occupied by various missions and pretenses.
Not discouraged by his first attempt, in 35 Tiberius dispatched another Arsacid prince, this time Tiridates (III), a grandson of Phraates IV, and appointed L. Vitellius as governor of Syria. To make the task of Vitellius easier he planned to set up a rival king in Armenia, and to this end he reconciled Pharasmanes, king of Iberia, and his brother Mithradates. Financial encouragement was offered to Pharasmanes to place his brother on the Armenian throne. Since to this was added the incentive of removing so dangerous an opponent to a safe distance, Pharasmanes undertook the task. Arsaces, the son of Artabanus, was murdered by his attendants, who had been bribed, and Pharasmanes took Artaxata without resistance. When this news reached the Parthian court, Artabanus at once sent his son Orodes to recover the lost dependency.
Unfortunately Orodes was unable to secure sufficient mercenary troops, since the passes through which they must come were controlled by the Ibe​rians. The Parthian forces consisted almost wholly of cavalry, while the Iberians had a force of infantry. Orodes was unwilling to risk a battle against superior odds and prudently evaded the issue until forced by his men to give battle. When the Parthian prince was defeated in personal combat by Pharasmanes, the troops of the defeated leader, supposing him to be dead, fled from the field.
Artabanus in 36 gathered the remaining forces of his empire and advanced against the Iberians. The Alani, possibly incited by agents of Vitellius, had moved through the passes of the Caucasus and, unopposed by the Iberians, had swarmed into Parthian territory. Before Artabanus could force a decisive engagement, Vitellius took the field at the head of his legions and spread the rumor that he was about to invade Mesopotamia. Because he felt it impossible to maintain the struggle in Armenia and at the same time engage in a war with Rome, Artabanus withdrew from Armenia to defend his homeland. When he had thus attained his objective, Vitellius modified his policy and by means of bribes encouraged disaffection within the Parthian kingdom. He was so successful that Artabanus was compelled to retire to his eastern frontier with only a band of foreign mer​cenaries. There he hoped to find support among those long-time friends of Parthia, the tribes to the east of the lower Caspian Sea, for he felt sure that the Parthians would soon tire of a ruler set up by Rome.
Meanwhile Vitellius urged Tiridates to seize his kingdom while opportunity offered, and to this end conducted him with legions and allies to the banks of the Euphrates. After sacrifices were made and the omens found favorable, a bridge of boats was thrown across the river and the army passed over it to Parthian territory. There they were met by Ornospades, a Parthian who had served under Tiberius and had thus won Roman citizenship. Shortly afterward Sinnaces arrived with more troops, and Abdagases brought the royal treasure and ornaments.
The Greek cities of Mesopotamia, such as Nicephorium and Anthemusia, and the Parthian cities, such as Halus and Artemita, all welcomed Tiridates, who was apparently acceptable to the Greeks, the nobility, and the pro-Romans. Seleucia received him ​with acclaim, and his supporters were rewarded with control of the city government, displacing the more aristocratic group which had upheld Artabanus. Coronation ceremonies were delayed pending the arrival of Phraates and Hiero, two powerful nobles. This Phraates was perhaps satrap of Susiana, then an important Parthian province. These two nobles were probably engaged in negotiations with Artabanus, with whom they shortly allied themselves, for they failed to appear at the coronation, and Tiridates was crowned by a member of the Suren family according to the custom. Restrained by lack of funds from an attack on Artabanus, now installed in the far eastern part of the empire, Tiridates laid siege to a fort in which the former ruler had left his treasure and his concubines. The possession of the royal harem was vital to recognition by the country at large, and we have seen how Phraates IV slew his women rather than allow them to fall into the possession of the pretender Tiridates.
Parthia was never long sympathetic with kings who held their crowns by virtue of Roman support, ​and the disaffected party probably had strong support from the two nobles who had failed to attend the coronation. Artabanus was discovered in Hyrcania clothed in dirty rags and living by his bow. Naturally he was suspicious of a trap when first approached, but eventually he became convinced of the reality of Parthian dislike for Tiridates if not of the people's love for himself. Artabanus hesitated only long enough to gather some Dahae and Sacae contingents before he hastened forward, still in his rags, which he continued to wear to arouse sympathy. He was in the vicinity of Seleucia before his opponent made a move. Some of the adherents of Tiridates advised bringing the struggle to an immediate issue before the troops of Artabanus could be reorganized and rested. Another faction, headed by the king's chief adviser, Abdagases, suggested a retreat across the Tigris into Mesopotamia proper, for this would delay action until the arrival of Roman troops and of Armenian and Elymaean forces. Tiridates, who was not of a warlike disposition, agreed to the withdrawal. The strategic retreat soon took on the aspect of a flight, for his troops deserted rapidly. Among the first to leave were the nomadic tribes; and they were soon followed by others, some of whom went over to Artabanus. Tiridates fled to Syria, where he arrived with scarcely more than a handful of men.
Artabanus evidently had little trouble in reoc​cupying the country. Tiberius desired to have the struggle formally ended and instructed Vitellius to that effect late in a.d. 36. Artabanus expressed his willingness and met the Roman commander on a bridge of boats across the Euphrates. Each was escorted by a guard. We do not know the terms agreed upon, but not long afterward Artabanus' son Darius was sent to Rome to live. Negotiations completed, Herod Antipas, the Jewish tetrarch and a Roman ally, invited both leaders to a rich feast in a tent erected on the bridge. Among other objects, Josephus says that the Parthians presented the Romans with a Jewish giant some seven cubits in height! After the banquet Vitellius went to Antioch and Artabanus to "Babylon."
Struggle after struggle between contenders for the throne for over half a century had reduced Parthia to a state of anarchy, and the good effects of the strong rule of Artabanus had been largely negated by his contest with Tiridates. This situation is clearly reflected in the coinage, for from the beginning of the Christian era until about a.d. 40 there are frequent intervals for which no royal coins are known. The kings were either not in possession of the mint cities ​or were too poverty-stricken to be able to coin money. If life and commerce continued, it was because of the strength of local authorities or the power and prestige of ancient cities. The story of Anilaeus and Asinaeus (pp. 155 f.) well illustrates the situation in Parthia about this time. Artabanus was forced to recognize the virtual independence of large areas in the north, and Parthian troops and officials were everywhere helpless. Within Seleucia there was continual strife between opposing elements. The native or Babylonian group and the Jews at first combined against the Greeks with success; but the Greeks managed to alienate the natives from their former allies, and together they massacred thousands of Jews.
One specific example is known to us of the way in which the great commercial centers met this breakdown of authority. About two years before the death of Tiberius, which took place in March, a.d. 37, the great mint city of Seleucia, center of the royal power, revolted. For five years no royal coinage had been struck in the city. Then the strong commercial elements, wearied of the bickerings of petty contenders for the throne, declared their independence. Life within and without the city probably continued much as usual, except in time of actual siege. During the ​seven years of the revolt Seleucia maintained an independent position.
Not long after the meeting between Vitellius and Artabanus discontent was again manifest among the nobles. The situation appeared so hopeless to the king that he thought it prudent to leave the country and place himself under the protection of his neighbor and vassal, Izates II of Adiabene. The story of the Parthian vassal kings of Adiabene is an interesting one. The first king known to us, Izates (I), had two children, Helena and Monobazus (I). Following the custom then prevalent, these two were married. Monobazus succeeded to the throne about a.d. 30. Izates II, their son, was sent to Adinerglus, king of Charax, for safety from the threat of death which hangs over all youthful oriental princes who are surrounded by half-brothers with zealous mothers. While there he was converted to Judaism by a commercial Jew. When Izates was old enough, his father recalled him and gave him land in Gorduene. Through the efforts of another Jew, Helena adopted the new faith. On the death of Monobazus I, about a.d. 36, Izates II came to the throne of Adiabene.
Upon the abdication of Artabanus a certain Cinna​mus, who had been brought up by Artabanus, was selected to rule. Artabanus arrived at the court of Izates with a thousand relatives and retainers, and his faithful vassal was easily persuaded to act as mediator. In response to a letter from Izates suggesting that Artabanus resume his throne, the Parthians replied that, since Cinnamus had already been installed, they feared another change would bring civil war. Cinnamus, either because of genuine friendship for Artabanus or because he felt his own position very insecure, offered to abdicate in favor of the former ruler and even placed the crown on the head of the exile himself. Izates was rewarded by the gift of the city of Nisibis and its surrounding lands, which were detached from the Armenian kingdom.
Artabanus lived but a short time after his restoration, for the evidence suggests that he died about a.d. 38. He was followed by Gotarzes II, who was ​probably not an Arsacid but may have been of Hyrcanian origin, the son of a man named Gew. Gotarzes had two brothers, Artabanus and Vardanes, whom he evidently feared, for he murdered the first together with his wife and son, and the second fled far away. Gotarzes had been on the throne about a year when in a.d. 39 the nobles called in Vardanes, who is reported by Tacitus to have covered three thousand stadia in two days. Such a feat, if not impossible, is very extraordinary. As a result of this hasty trip Vardanes surprised and put to flight Gotarzes. The deposed ruler escaped to the country of the Dahae, where he occupied himself with plots against his brother.
If the rule of Vardanes was to be firmly established, control of the mint city of Seleucia was essential. He began a siege of the city, which was strongly fortified by walls and by its natural defenses, the river and the canals, and was well provisioned. Perhaps Vardanes made use of Ctesiphon as his base of operations, for at a later date he was believed to have been its founder.
​In the meantime Gotarzes had enlisted the aid of the Dahae and the Hyrcanians and soon advanced to recover his kingdom. Vardanes abandoned the siege of Seleucia in 39 and moved his forces to the great Bactrian plain, far to the east; but preparations for the battle were suddenly interrupted when Gotarzes discovered that the nobles were planning to take the throne away from both his brother and himself. Drawn together by this common danger, the brothers agreed that Vardanes was to occupy the throne of Parthia and Gotarzes was to withdraw to Hyrcania. "Victory" coins were struck by the aristocratic party in Seleucia in the years 40/41—43/44 in celebration of their triumph over the popular party and the restoration of Vardanes to the throne.
In the spring of 42 the sage Apollonius of Tyana passed through Babylonia on his way to India. Vardanes had but two years and two months before recovered his throne; Seleucia still apparently remained in revolt, and Vardanes was established in Babylon. The account of Philostratus suggests that Vardanes' territory was limited in extent, for Apollonius passed into Parthia after leaving Nineveh, ​which evidently belonged to Adiabene and hence to the kingdom of Gotarzes. By June, a.d. 42, Vardanes had again advanced to the neighborhood of Seleucia and under guidance of the aristocratic party, then apparently favorable to his candidacy for the throne, the city had voluntarily surrendered. The revolt, which had lasted for seven years, was thus ended.
Philostratus reports that the governor of Syria sent an embassy to Vardanes regarding two villages (in Roman territory near a Zeugma) which the Parthians had recently seized. Because of their lack of importance they were apparently surrendered without a struggle. He states further that Megabates, a brother of the king, saw Apollonius in Antioch.
The Iberian Mithradates, Roman appointee to the throne of Armenia, having proved unsatisfactory to the patron nation, was brought back, imprisoned, and then banished by Caligula. Shortly after the latter's death in 41, his successor Claudius released Mithradates and sent him eastward to regain his kingdom, the throne of which had apparently been vacant for some time and then had been seized by the Parthians. Supported by Roman troops and by Iberians supplied by his brother Pharasmanes, Mithradates defeated the Armenians under Demonax with ​ease. Lesser Armenia under Cotys continued resistance for some time, but it too was at last subdued. The new king, perhaps because he felt insecure, ruled with great cruelty, which soon caused appeals for aid to the Parthian Vardanes. The Parthian king attempted to secure the help of one of his principal vassals, Izates II of Adiabene, but was unable to convince him that a campaign against Mithradates had much chance of success. The fact that his five sons were in Rome undoubtedly influenced Izates. Angered by the latter's refusal, Vardanes began a campaign against his vassal. Possibly for the purpose of distracting Vardanes, Vibius Marsus, governor of Syria from 42 to 45, made a feint at the Euphrates frontier.
The position of Vardanes was perhaps becoming too strong for the nobles; at any rate they encouraged Gotarzes to secure the throne. About 43 Gotarzes collected an army and advanced to the river Erindes (probably the ancient Charindas) in Hyrcania. The passage of this stream was hotly contested, and Vardanes at last managed to prevent his brother from ​crossing. This victory Vardanes followed up with other successes until he was master of all the territory to the river Sindes, which separated the Dahae from the people of Aria. There the troops refused to advance farther, and a monument was erected.
About the end of 45 the conflict between the brothers broke out again, and from 46/47 to 47/48 they were engaged in a struggle which terminated with the death of Vardanes. He was assassinated by the nobles, probably at the instigation of Gotarzes, while engaged in the national sport of the chase. With the death of Vardanes, a thoroughly native king, the only hope of Gotarzes' opponents lay in appeal to Rome.
From this period onward the dates given in this volume are calculated on the basis of a readjustment in the calendar which took place between the years a.d. 16/17 and 46/47, almost certainly in the latter year. The 19-year cycle of intercalation introduced in 747 b.c. had been employed without change since 367 b.c. The calendar year was again brought into conformity with the solar year by the insertion of a full month so that henceforth the Macedonian month Xandicus instead of Artemisius corresponds to the Babylonian Nisan, the beginning of the year.
​There was a division of opinion as to who should succeed to the Parthian throne; many favored Gotarzes, while others preferred Meherdates, son of Vonones I and grandson of Phraates IV, who had been sent to Rome. Because of the general dislike of Romanized Parthians and perhaps because of the proximity of Gotarzes, he was accepted as king again. But further reports of cruelties and excesses soon appeared, and in 47 an appeal was made to Rome for Meherdates. Claudius responded favorably and ordered C. Cassius Longinus, governor of Syria, to conduct the new pretender to the Euphrates. In 49 the expedition set out; at Zeugma a halt was made to await the Parthian supporters of Meherdates. Cassius urged an immediate advance before the ardor of the adherents of Meherdates could cool, and the head of the great house of Karen sent messengers with the same advice. Through the influence of Abgarus V of Edessa Meherdates was persuaded to make his advance through Armenia, where he was delayed for some time in the capital of this Arab ruler. After much hardship in the snow and mountains of Armenia, Meherdates reached the level ground, where ​he was joined by forces under the command of the head of the Karen family. Crossing the Tigris they proceeded through Adiabene to Nineveh and Arbela. Faced with such an army, Izates of Adiabene could do nothing less than exhibit friendliness, however transitory. When they turned southward they found Gotarzes in a strong defensive position behind the river Corma (ʿAdhaim?). Since, however, his troops were insufficient to force the issue, Gotarzes sought to delay a decisive battle while he attempted to win over the troops of his opponents. Izates and Abgarus were thus lost by Meherdates, who, fearing a general exodus, determined to strike before all his army melted away. The battle remained undecided until the Karen, who had defeated the forces opposed to him and carried his pursuit too far, was met on his return by the reserves of Gotarzes and was slain. His army defeated and its morale broken, Meherdates threw himself on the mercy of a certain Parraces, one of his father's vassals. This man betrayed him and gave him in chains to Gotarzes, who cropped his ears, that he might never again reign, but spared his life.
Probably in commemoration of this victory Gotarzes about a.d. 50 cut a great relief on the rock at ​Behistun. It shows him charging the foe with leveled spear, while overhead hovers a winged Victory crowning the king with a wreath. The accompanying inscription reads ΓΩΤΑΡΣΗϹ ΓΕΟΠΟΘΡΟϹ, "Gotarzes, son of Gew."
In 51 Gotarzes either died of some disease or fell the victim of a plot. He was succeeded by a certain Vonones (II), who was king of Media. Vonones must have reigned but a few months; the empire then passed to his son or brother Vologases I.
About a.d. 52 Pharasmanes of Iberia sent his ​son Rhadamistus to invade Armenia, which was at that time in the hands of the pro-Roman Mithradates, brother of the Iberian ruler. Mithradates was soon besieged in Gorneae (Garni), not far from Artaxata, the capital. The Roman garrison in the beleaguered town was under the command of the prefect Caelius Pollio and the centurion Casperius. Rhadamistus attempted to bribe Pollio to surrender Gorneae; the prefect was sorely tempted to accept, but Casperius refused to be a party to such an affair. He secured a temporary truce and set out to persuade Pharasmanes to abandon the war or, if he should be unsuccessful there, to carry the news to Ummidius Quadratus, legate of Syria. Casperius reached Pharasmanes, but his negotiations with him were unsuccessful, for the Iberian king wrote secretly urging Rhadamistus to press the siege in every possible manner. The bribe offered to Pollio was increased, and, with the restraining influence of the centurion absent, a deal was soon struck. The Roman soldiers forced Mithradates to surrender by threatening to ​refuse to fight. Mithradates, his wife, and all his children were murdered at the command of Rhadamistus, who thus came into possession of Armenia.
Quadratus heard of these events, perhaps through the centurion Casperius, and ordered a council of war. Pharasmanes was commanded to recall Rhadamistus and withdraw from Armenia, but no other action was taken. Julius Paelignus, procurator of Cappadocia, gathered together some provincial auxiliaries, ostensibly to recover Armenia but actually to despoil his friends. Deserted by his troops, he was forced to flee to Rhadamistus, whom he urged to assume the crown and in whose coronation he participated. When Quadratus heard of these proceedings, he dispatched Helvidius Priscus with a legion to set matters right. Priscus had already crossed the Taurus and restored order in some measure when he was recalled. This sudden change on the part of the Romans was caused by the fact that the newly crowned Vologases I of Parthia was contemplating an advance into Armenia and the presence of Roman legions on soil which was considered Parthian was certain to cause trouble.
Vologases, who was the son of a Greek concubine, had two brothers, Pacorus and Tiridates. Vologases ​was probably the eldest, since his brothers yielded to him their claims to the throne. To Pacorus, the elder of his two brothers, Vologases had given Media Atropatene; it was now imperative that a suitable position be found for the younger, Tiridates. Since Armenia, which was felt to be properly Parthian territory, was unsettled, Vologases saw therein an opportunity to strengthen his own position and at the same time provide a satrapy for Tiridates.
Vologases about a.d. 52 began an advance into Armenia, where he encountered little resistance. In his rapid advance he took the important city of Tigranocerta and then the capital, Artaxata. Because of the severity of the winter, which had then closed in, and the attendant lack of provisions, Vologases was forced to abandon his conquest. Rhadamistus, who had fled on his approach, at once returned and began to rule with great cruelty, at least according to the reports which reached Rome.
In the meantime the nobles of Adiabene had become dissatisfied with the rule of Izates II and proposed Parthian intervention to Vologases. The Parthian ruler demanded that Izates give up the special privileges granted to him by Artabanus III and resume ​his status as vassal of the empire. Izates, fully aware of the temerity of his defiance, sent his wives and children to a citadel, gathered all the grain into the fortified places, and burned all the forage in the open country. When these preparations were complete Izates took up a position with some six thousand cavalry on the Upper Zab River, which separated Adiabene from Media. Vologases arrived by forced marches and camped near by, whence he sent messages to Izates boasting of the greatness of the Parthian empire, which extended from the Euphrates to the boundaries of Bactria. Interchange of words was still taking place when the threat of an invasion of eastern Parthia by tribes east of the Caspian Sea forced Vologases to withdraw.
Not long after the return of Rhadamistus to Armenia the people again arose and drove him from the country. His wife Zenobia, who accompanied him in his flight, was at length so weary that she could go no farther, and to prevent her falling into the hands of his enemies Rhadamistus stabbed her and cast her into the Araxes River. Some shepherds found her still alive and took her to Artaxata, whence she was sent to Tiridates. The Parthian king treated her kindly, not necessarily for humanitarian reasons, but because through her he had a legitimate claim on Armenia. Tiridates returned to Armenia about the year 54.
* ↑ The son of Musa was old enough to rule Parthia in 2 b.c.; cf. p. 147.
* ↑ He is probably the Aphrahat the son of Aphrahat who ruled over Seleucia and Ctesiphon of Beth Aramaya according to Mar Mari in Acta martyrum et sanctorum, ed. Paul Bedjan (Paris, 1890–97), I, 68, § 7.
* ↑ PW, art. "Syria," col. 1629. Titius was governor from 10 to 9 b.c.
* ↑ Mon. Ancyr. vi (32). Seraspadanes and Rhodaspes are mentioned in an inscription found in Rome, CIL, VI, No. 1799 = Dessau 842. See also Strabo vi. 4. 2 and xvi. 1. 28; Tac. Ann. ii. 1 f.; Vell. Pat. ii. 94.4; Justin xlii. 5. 12; Josephus Ant. xviii. 42; Suet. Augustus 21.3 and 43.4; Eutrop. Brev. vii. 9; Orosius vi. 21. 29.
* ↑ They are generally spoken of as hostages (see the references in the preceding note); but this word, like "tribute," was regularly abused by ancient writers.
* ↑ CIL, XIV, No. 2216; Gardthausen, "Die Parther," p. 844.
* ↑ Od. iv. 5. 25.
* ↑ Horace Carmen saec. 53 ff.; Epist. ii. 1. 112 and 256; Od. iv. 14. 42 and 15. 23.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xvi. 253; Wroth, Parthia, p. xxxviii; Gutschmid, Geschichte Irans, p. 116.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xvii. 23–27; PW, art. "Sentius (Saturninus)," No. 9, cols. 1518 f.
* ↑ Szadzunski, Talmudical Writings, passim.
* ↑ Cf. Dio Cass. lv. 10a. On the coins of Tigranes and Erato see Barclay V. Head, Historia numorum (Oxford, 1887), p. 636 (the Armenian material was omitted from the 2d ed., 1911). For further numismatic bibliography see PW, art. "Erato," No. 9. This period in general is dealt with in PW, art. "Iulius (Augustus)," No. 132, cols. 350 ff.; CAH, X, 254–64 and 273–79; F. B. Marsh, The Reign of Tiberius (Oxford, 1931), pp. 81 ff. and 211 ff. See also PW, art. "Tigranes," No. 4.
* ↑ Dio Cass. lv. 9; Zonaras x. 35; (Ovid) Consol. ad Liviam 389 ff. may refer to the commission of Tiberius.
* ↑ Cf. Tac. Ann. ii. 3.
* ↑ Artavasdes struck coins with portraits of Augustus and himself; see Percy Gardner, "On an Unpublished Coin of Artavasdes II., King of Armenia," Num. Chron., N.S., XII (1872), 9–15. Besides the fact that the portrait of Augustus is reasonably youthful, the Artavasdes from Media would probably not have followed such a model.
* ↑ The earliest coins of Phraataces are dated early in 310 s.e.; see Wroth, Parthia, pp. xl and 136.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. ii. 4; Dio Cass. lv. 10. 18; Vell. Pat. ii. 100. i; cf. Mon. Ancyr. v (27).
* ↑ Pliny Hist. nat. vi. 141; E. Herzfeld, "Sakastan," AMI, IV (1932), 4–8. Cf. Rostovtzeff in CAH, XI, 126, who dates Isidore in the time of Pliny (d. a.d. 79). His argument is based on the mention of an Artabazus, king of Characene, in Lucian Long. 16. But no coins of this king are known, and information given by Isidore does not otherwise extend beyond Augustus' time. See PW, art. "Mesene," cols. 1091 f.
* ↑ Dio Cass. lv. 10. 20.
* ↑ Vell. Pat. ii. 101. 1.
* ↑ Cf. the passage from Antipater of Thessalonica urging Gaius on to the Euphrates, Anthol. Palat. ix. 297, and the mentions of Armenia and the Araxes in Crinagoras ibid. 430. See also Suet. Nero 5. 1 and Tiberius 12. 2; Plut. Reg. imp. apophtheg. 207. 10.
* ↑ The date is fixed by the appearance of the head of Musa for the first time on the coins along with that of Phraataces; see Gardner, Parthian Coinage, pp. 45 f. The only other appearance of the heads of king and queen together on the Parthian coinage is in the reign of Gotarzes II; see Wroth, Parthia, p. 172.
* ↑ Cf. Josephus Ant. xviii. 42 f.; Lucan De bell. civ. viii. 401–10; M. Felix Octavius xxxi. 3; Orac. Sibyl, vii. 38–50.
* ↑ Justin xli. 3. 5. Silius Italicus xiii. 473 f. mentions that it was proper to bring dogs to the royal corpses in Hyrcania. Lucian De luctu 21 notes that the Persians bury their dead. See also Herzfeld, Archaeological History of Iran (London, 1935), pp. 38 f.
* ↑ PW s.v., No. 1. The spelling and date are fixed by CIL, IX, No. 5290.
* ↑ PW, art. "Donnes." The spelling is uncertain; perhaps Dones or Addus is better.
* ↑ Strabo xi. 14. 6; Dio Cass. lv. 10a. 6–9; Vell. Pat. ii. 102; Florus ii. 32; Ruf. Fest. 19; Tac. Ann. i. 3; CIL, IX, No. 5290.
* ↑ Mon. Ancyr. v (27).
* ↑ Antipater of Thessalonica in Anthol. Palat. ix. 59.
* ↑ Seneca De cons. ad Polyb. xv. 4; Ovid Ars amat. i. 177 ff., 199 ff., 223 ff.; Remedia amoris 155 ff. and 224. The verse last cited possibly expresses disappointment over the failure of the expedition.
* ↑ Seneca De brev. vit. iv. 5.
* ↑ Mon. Ancyr. v (27). There is a Greek inscription from Susa of about this date which mentions Zamaspes, stratiarch of Susa, who was commended by Phraates for watering the gardens of the guards. Note the continued use of Macedonian titles at this late date. The inscription should be dated either 9/8 b.c., under Phraates IV, or a.d. 2/3, under Phraataces; see F. Cumont, "Inscriptions grecques de Suse," CR, 1931, pp. 238–50.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xviii. 42 f.
* ↑ Gardner, Parthian Coinage, p. 46; the last coins of Musa and Phraataces are dated Hyperberetaeus, 315 s.e.
* ↑ Cf. Josephus Ant. xviii. 42 f. and Mon. Ancyr. vi (32).
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xviii. 44 f.
* ↑ The only known coin of Orodes, if indeed it is properly assigned, is dated 317 s.e., i.e., a.d. 6/7; see Gardner, Parthian Coinage, p. 46 and Pl. V. 1. No coins were struck in the two years which followed.
* ↑ Suet. Tiberius 16.
* ↑ Mon. Ancyr. vi (33); Tac. Ann. ii. 1–2; Josephus Ant. xviii. 46. This is probably the Vonones mentioned in a poem quoted by Ausonius Epist. xxiii. 6. The poem, sent him by Pontius Paulinus, was based on Suetonius Lives of the Kings, a work now lost.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. ii. 3 and vi. 36 and 42; Josephus Ant. xviii. 48. See also PW, art. "Hyrkania," cols. 507 f., and Werner Schur, Die Orientpolitik des Kaisers Nero (Klio, Beiheft XV [1923]), pp. 70 ff. Vonones' existing coins are dated a.d. 9/10, 11/12, and 12/13; see McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, p. 187.
* ↑ Wroth, Parthia, pp. xliii and 143 f.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xviii. 48–50; McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, p. 187. This Artabanus is probably the same one mentioned by Mar Mari in Acta martyrum et sanctorum, I, 79, § 8.
* ↑ Mon. Ancyr. v (27); Tac. Ann. ii. 3 f. and vi. 40; Josephus Ant. xviii 140 and Bell. ii. 222. See also PW, art. "Tigranes," No. 5.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. ii. 4. Cf. Josephus Ant. xviii. 50–52; W. E. Gwatkin, Cappadocia as a Roman Procuratorial Province ("University of Missouri Studies," V 4 [Columbia, Mo., 1930]), p. 13; McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, p. 223.
* ↑ PW, art. "Caecilius," No. 90.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. ii. 43.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. ii. 56; cf. also Suet. Gaius 1. 2 and Strabo xii. 3. 29. Coins were struck in Caesarea of Cappadocia with the legend GERMA­NICUS ARTAXIAS and with the coronation scene; see Mattingly and Sydenham, Rom. Imp. Coin., I, 104, No. 8. Mattingly suggests that these were perhaps struck by Caligula.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. ii. 58; the contemporary Strabo xvi. 1. 28 confirms the fact that the Euphrates was still the boundary.
* ↑ J. Cantineau, "Textes palmyréniens provenant de la fouille du temple de Bêl," Syria, XII (1931), 139–41; H. Seyrig, "Antiquités syriennes," Syria, XIII (1932), 266–69.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. ii. 68; Suet. Tiberius 49. 2. On Remmius see PW s.v., No. 3.
* ↑ Suet. Tiberius 41.
* ↑ Ant. xviii. 310–79.
* ↑ Arrian Parthica xi, Νάαρδα; see also PW, art. "Νἀαρδα." This city lay on the Euphrates not far from Sippar and near the mouth of the Nahr Malka.
* ↑ This chronology is not exact, but it seems to fit the evidence. If the six-year period mentioned by Josephus Ant. xviii. 373 represents, as it seems to do, the duration of the revolt of Seleucia, which began in a.d. 35 (see p. 164), then subtraction of the fifteen peaceful years (Josephus Ant. xviii. 339) gives a.d. 20 for the beginning of the brothers' activities.
* ↑ Artabanus ceased coining money long before the end of his reign. McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, p. 188, reports his last known coin as dated a.d. 27/28 but adds with a query coins from 29/30 and 30/31.
* ↑ F. Cumont, "Une lettre du roi Artaban III," CR, 1932, pp. 238–60; M. Rostovtzeff, "L'Hellénisme en Mésopotamie," Scientia, LIII (1933), 120 f.; C. Bradford Welles, Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic Period (New Haven, 1934), pp. 299–306. As to Welles, op. cit., p. 302, note that while Dura-Europus would follow the Syrian Seleucid era beginning October, 312 b.c., Susa would use the Babylonian one beginning April, 311 b.c. The Parthian era dates from April, 247 (not 248) b.c.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. vi. 31. Cf. also Philostratus Vita Apoll. ii. 2.
* ↑ Tac. loc. cit.; Dio Cass, lviii. 26; Suet. Tiberius 66.
* ↑ E. S. Drower, The Mandaeans of Iraq and Iran (Oxford, 1937), pp. 6 ff., suggests that Madai may have been a city in Media, the homeland of Artabanus, or may have been located farther east.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. vi. 33; Dio Cass, lviii. 26; Josephus Ant. xviii. 97; Pliny Hist. nat. xv. 83.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. vi. 35; Josephus Ant. xviii. 97 ff. From Tiberius to Severus Alexander the Orac. Sibyl. xii. 47–288 furnishes a fairly extensive sketch of Roman history.
* ↑ Josephus loc. cit.; Rostovtzeff, Iranians and Greeks in South Russia (Oxford, 1922), p. 116. Cf. Seneca Thyestes 630 f.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. vi. 36; Josephus Ant. xviii. 100.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. vi. 37; cf. Rawlinson, Sixth Mon., p. 234. Ornospades was not yet satrap of Mesopotamia, an honor which he received after he rejoined his king.
* ↑ This distinction between Greek and Parthian cities is made by a number of ancient authors. Besides cities given above from Tac. Ann. vi. 41, Isid. Char. Mans. Parth. 1–3 mentions Ichnae, Nicephorium, Artemita, and Chala as Greek cities. Note that Artemita is called both Greek and Parthian; on its location see T. Jacobsen in Four Ancient Towns in the Diyala Region, a forthcoming Oriental Institute Publication.
* ↑ McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, p. 225, suggests that his supporters in Seleucia were the native elements, consistently pro-Roman. This idea cannot be reconciled with information from Tacitus, which clearly indicates that the three groups behind Tiridates were the Greeks, the nobility, and the pro-Romans, unless we assume the last to be the native elements.
* ↑ Suggested by Cumont, "Une lettre du roi Artaban III," CR, 1932, pp. 249 f.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xviii. 100; Tac. Ann. vi. 44.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xviii. 101–3. Cf. Dio Cass. lix. 17. 5 and 27. 2 f.; Suet. Vitellius 1. 4 and Gaius 19; all of these either place this incident in the reign of Gaius or leave the question unsettled. See Eugen Taubler, Die Parthernachrichten bei Josephus (Berlin, 1904), pp. 33–39.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xviii. 103 f. This is probably an early case of confusion between Babylon and Seleucia.
* ↑ Numismatic evidence given in McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, pp. 225 and 188 ff., and Wroth, Parthia, p. xlvi, when combined with Tacitus' statement (Ann. xi. 9. 6) that the revolt lasted seven years, enables us to date its beginning. On the coins struck by the city during the revolt see McDowell, op. cit., pp. 141 f., No. 141.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xx. 22, Abennerigus. The Ad(or b)inerglus named on coins of a.d. 10(?) may be identical with the Adinn(e)rglus of a.d. 22; see G. F. Hill, Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Arabia, Mesopotamia and Persia (London, 1922), pp. cxcix–cci.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xx. 17–37 and 54. "Gorduene" depends on an emendation; the text reads Καρρῶν, which is impossible (cf. PW s.v.).
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xx. 54–69.
* ↑ Vardanes, the second successor of Artabanus, was in the third year and second month of his restoration when Apollonius of Tyana visited him (see n. 81). Seleucia, which surrendered in the spring of 42 (see p. 169), was then still in revolt.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xi. 8. Cf. Josephus Ant. xx. 69, whose condensed account apparently makes Vardanes the first to mount the throne. For somewhat uncertain numismatic evidence which upholds Tacitus see Wroth, Parthia, pp. xlv f.; J. de Bartholomaei, "Recherches sur la numismatique des rois Arsacides," Mém. Soc. d'arch. et de num. de St. Pétersbourg, II (1848), 59; Herzfeld, Am Tor, pp. 45 and 47 f. Many of the exploits of Gotarzes appear in various forms in the Shahnamah; see J. C. Coyajee, "The House of Gotarzes: a Chapter of Parthian History in the Shahnameh," Asiatic Society of Bengal, Journ. and Proc., N.S., XXVIII (for 1932), 207–24.
* ↑ Herzfeld, Am Tor, pp. 40 ff. and Pls. XXI–XXIII; Herzfeld, "Kushano-Sasanian Coins," Mem. Archaeol. Survey of India, No. 38 (1930), p. 5; CIG, III, No. 4674. Philostratus Vita Apoll. i. 21 calls Gotarzes' brother, Vardanes, a Mede.
* ↑ Ann. xi. 8. 4. Tiberius traveled 184 miles in a night and a day over well constructed Roman roads with an elaborate system of relays. Possibly the royal post roads of Persia had survived in better shape than we have suspected, but approximately 350 miles in two days is still remarkable.
* ↑ Amm. Marcel. xxiii. 23.
* ↑ McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, pp. 225 f.
* ↑ Philostratus Vita Apoll. i. 19–40; cf. A. von Gutschmid, Kleine Schriften, III (Leipzig, 1892), 58 f.
* ↑ Philostratus Vita Apoll. i. 28; cf. also i. 21.
* ↑ Ibid. i. 21. Ctesiphon alone is mentioned. The reference to Babylon cannot in this case be assigned to Seleucia, although such details cannot be pressed too far in this source.
* ↑ He at once began the issue of royal coinage; see McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, p. 189.
* ↑ Philostratus Vita Apoll. i 31 and 37.
* ↑ Dio Cass. lx. 8; Seneca De tranquillitate animi 11. 12; Tac. Ann. xi.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xi. 10; Josephus Ant. xx. 72.
* ↑ Gotarzes' first coins, Wroth, Parthia, p. 161, were struck early in 355 s.e., i.e., a.d. 44/45; cf. McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, pp. 226 f. and table, p. 189. If Avroman II (see p. 140, end of n. 53) is dated in the Arsacid era, it should be placed in a.d. 44. It seems better, however, as indicated in chap. ii, to consider that the Seleucid era was used and that the date is 21/20 b.c.; cf. p. 47, n. 70. The occurrence of the name Cleopatra among the queens is a further argument for the earlier dating, for after Actium Cleopatra was not a popular name; see PW, arts. "Kleopatra."
* ↑ PW, art. "Hyrkania," cols. 468 and 506 f.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xi. 10. 3.
* ↑ McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, p. 190. Vardanes' coins stop in the fourth month of 45/46, but this proves only that Vardanes no longer held Seleucia. Furthermore, coins of 46/47 and 47/48 bear the personal name of Gotarzes and thus prove that he had a rival, who was most probably Vardanes.
* ↑ McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, pp. 151–53; cf. J. Johnson, Dura Studies (Roma, 1931), pp. 1–15.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xi. 10. Tacitus' information would of necessity be based largely on the reports brought to Rome by delegates of the dissatisfied parties.
* ↑ Gutschmid, Geschichte Irans, p. 127 and n. 2; Wroth, Parthia, p. xlvii.
* ↑ Cf. the reference to some Parthian victory of Claudius, Seneca Apocolocyntosis 11.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xii. 13 f.; PW, art. "Corma." Sanbulus (see PW s.v.), the mountain where Gotarzes offered sacrifices to Hercules, is probably the Sunbula Kuh. Both the ʿAdhaim and the Diyala are so small in summer that the troops would scarcely notice them; hence their omission in Tacitus' account is understandable.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xii. 13 f.
* ↑ Herzfeld, Am Tor, pp. 40 ff. and Pls. XXI–XXIII. Probably, as C. Hopkins in M. I. Rostovtzeff and P. V. C. Bauer, The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Second Season, 1928–29 (New Haven, 1931), p. 93, suggests, the dedicatory inscription to Zeus Soter dated a.d. 50/51, found at Dura, should be referred to this civil war.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xii. 14. 7.
* ↑ Cf. McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, p. 191, who finds a coin of Gotarzes dated three months after the first of those struck by Vologases. This find strongly supports Josephus Ant. xx. 74, who says that Gotarzes was the victim of a plot.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xii. 14. 7. Josephus does not mention Vonones; but Tacitus cannot be discredited on the basis of the abbreviated account of the Jewish historian, who may well have deliberately omitted the name of Vonones because of his unimportance. No coins can be assigned to him.
* ↑ Son, Tac. loc. cit.; brother, Josephus loc. cit. The date a.d. 54 for the close of the reign of Vonones, proposed by Gutschmid, Geschichte Irans p. 128 and n. 2, is too late.
* ↑ The whole chronological question from 51 to 63 is very complex; see the editions of Tacitus by L. Nipperday and H. Furneaux; E. Egli, "Feldzüge in Armenien von 41–63 n. Chr.," in Max Büdinger, Untersuchungen zur römischen Kaisergeschichte (Leipzig, 1868), pp. 267–362; H. Schiller, Geschichte des römischen Kaiserreichs unter der Regierung des Nero (Berlin, 1872), pp. 91–205; Mommsen, Prov. Rom. Emp., II, 50 ff.; B. W. Henderson, "The Chronology of the Wars in Armenia, a.d. 51–63," Class. Rev., XV (1901), 159–65, 204–13, and 266–74; D. T. Schoonover, A Study of Cn. Domitius Corbulo as Found in the "Annals" of Tacitus (Chicago, 1906); Werner Schur, Die Orientpolitik des Kaisers Nero (Klio, Beiheft XV [1923]), pp. 7–38, and "Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Kriege Corbulos," Klio, XIX (1925), 75–96, and "Zur Neronischen Orientpolitik," Kilo, XX (1926), 215–22; Arnaldo Momigliano, "Corbulone e la politica romana verso i Parti," Atti del IIº congresso nazionale di studi romani, I (Roma, 1931), 368–75; Mason Hammond, "Corbulo and Nero's Eastern Policy," Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, XLV (Cambridge, 1934), 81–104.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xii. 44–47.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xii. 49. 1. Perhaps the same man as the Laelianus of Dio Cass. lxi. 6. 6; see PW, art. "Julius (Paelignus)," No. 374.
* ↑ Dio Cass. lxii (lxiii. 5); Josephus Ant. xx. 74; Tac. Ann. xii. 44. This Greek woman may well have been a long-time resident of Parthia.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xx. 74.
* ↑ If McDowell, Coins from Seleucia, p. 191, is right in assigning to Gotarzes II a coin as late as December, 51, then Vologases' invasion of Armenia is not likely to have taken place before 52. Cf. also CAH, X, 757 and n. 2, following Henderson, "Chron. of the Wars in Armenia," Class. Rev., XV (1901), 164 f.
* ↑ Josephus Ant. xx. 81–91.
* ↑ Tac. Ann. xii. 51 and xiii. 6.