CHAPTER II.

Early notices of the Parthians. Their Ethnic character and connections. Their position under the Persian Monarchs, from Cyrus the Great to Darius III. (Codomannus).

Πάρθων γένος Σκυθικόν.-Arrian, Fr. 1.

THE Parthians do not appear in history until a comparatively recent period. Their name occurs nowhere in the Old Testament Scriptures. They obtain no mention in the Zendavesta. The Assyrian Inscriptions are wholly silent concerning them. It is not until the time of Darius Hystaspis that we have trustworthy evidence of their existence as a distinct people.1 In the inscriptions of this king we find their country included under the name of Parthva or Parthwa among the provinces of the Persian Empire, joined in two places with Sarangia, Aria, Chorasmia, Bactria, and Sogdiana, and in a third with these same countries and Sagartia. We find, moreover, an account of a rebellion in which the Parthians took part. In the troubles which broke out upon the death of the Pseudo-Smerdis, B.C. 521, Parthia revolted, in conjunction (as it would seem) with Hyrcania, espousing the cause of that Median pretender, who, declaring himself a descendant of the old Median monarchs, set

1 Diodorus enumerates the Parthians among the nations conquered by Ninus (ii. 2, § 3), and also says that in the time of Cyaxares they revolted from the Medes and placed themselves under Scythian protection. But no value can be set upon

these stories, which he adopted from the untrustworthy Ctesias.

2 See Behist. Ins. col. i. par. 6, and Nakhsh-i-Rustam Ins. par. 3.

3 See the great inscription of Darius at Persepolis, par. 2, § 3.

himself up as a rival to Darius. Hystaspes, the father of Darius, held at this time the Parthian satrapy. In two battles within the limits of his province he defeated the rebels, who must have brought into the field a considerable force, since in one of the two engagements they lost in killed and prisoners between 10,000 and 11,000 men. After their second defeat the Parthians made their submission, and once more acknowledged Darius for their sovereign.1

With these earliest Oriental notices of the Parthians agree entirely such passages as contain any mention of them in the more ancient literature of the Greeks. Hecatæus of Miletus, who was contemporary with Darius Hystaspis, made the Parthians adjoin upon the Chorasmians in the account which he gave of the geography of Asia. Herodotus spoke of them as a people subject to the Persians in the reign of Darius, and assigned them to the sixteenth satrapy, which comprised also the Arians, the Sogdians, and the Chorasmians. He said that they took part in the expedition of Xerxes against Greece (B.C. 480), serving in the army on foot under the same commander as the Chorasmians, and equipped like them with bows and arrows, and with spears of no great length. In another passage he mentioned their being compelled to pay the Persian water tax, and spoke of the great need which they had of water for the irrigation of their millet and sesamé crops.5

It is evident that these notices agree with the Persian accounts, both as to the locality of the Parthians and as to the fact of their subjection to the

1 Behist. Ins. col. ii. par. 16, and

col. iii. par. 2 Fr. 173.

1.

3 Herod. iii. 93.

Ibid. vii. 66. Compare chap. 64. 5 Ibid. iii. 117.

Persian government. They further agree in assigning to the Parthians a respectable military character, yet one of no very special eminency. On the ethnology of the nation, and the circumstances under which the country became an integral part of the Persian dominions, they throw no light. We have still to seek an answer to the questions, Who were the Parthians?' and 'How did they become Persian subjects ?

Who were the Parthians? It is not until the Parthians have emerged from obscurity and become a great people that ancient authors trouble themselves with inquiries as to their ethnic character and remote antecedents. Of the first writers who take the subject into their consideration, some are content to say that the Parthians were a race of Scyths, who at a remote date had separated from the rest of the nation, and had occupied the southern portion of the Chorasmian desert, whence they had gradually made themselves masters of the mountain region adjoining it.1 Others added to this, that the Scythic tribe to which they belonged was called the Dahæ; that their own proper name was Parni, or Aparni; and that they had migrated originally from the country to the north of the Palus Mæotis, where they had left the great mass of their fellow tribesmen.2 Subsequently, in the time of the Antonines, the theory was started that the Parthians were Scyths, whom Sesostris, on his return from his Scythian expedition, brought into Asia and settled in the mountain-tract lying east of the Caspian.3 It can scarcely be thought that these notices have

As Trogus Pompeius, who is followed by Justin (xli. 1).

2 Strab. xi. 9, § 3. Compare xi. 8, § 2. Arrian, Fr. 1.

C

40

39

38

37

36

35

52

Lowell up as a rival to Darius Hystaof Darios, bell at this time the Parthian tw: battles within the Hits of his pro fested the rebels who must have brou fell & considerable force, since in one engagements they lost in killed and priso and 11.000 men. After their s the Parthians made their submission, and acknowledged Darius for their sovereign.1

With these earliest Oriental notices of tl. agree entirely such passages as contain any them in the more ancient literature of t Hecateus of Miletus, who was contempo Darius Hystaspis, made the Parthians adjoin Chorasmians in the geography of Asia. people subject to the

account which he gav Herodotus spoke of t Persians in the reign o and assigned them to the sixteenth satrap: comprised also the Arians, the Sogdians, Chorasmians. He said that they took part expedition of Xerxes against Greece (B.C serving in the army on foot under the sammander as the Chorasmians, and equipped like with bows and arrows, and with spears of no length. In another passage he mentioned their compelled to pay the Persian water tax, and spo the great need which they had of water for the gation of their millet and sesamé crops.5

It is evident that these notices agree with Persian accounts, both as to the locality of the I thians and as to the fact of their subjection to t

1 Behist. Ins. col. ii. par. 16, and

col. iii. par.
2 Fr. 173.

1.

3 Herod. iii. 93.

4 Ibid. vii. 66. Compare chap. 64. 5 Ibid. iii. 117.