about midway in the tract which lies due south of the Caspian Sea. The Elburz range in this part is one of so tremendous a character, and northward abuts so closely on the Caspian, that all communication between the east and the west necessarily passes to the south of it. In this quarter the Great Desert offering an insuperable obstacle to transit, the line of communication has to cling to the flanks of the mountain chain, the narrow strip between the mountains and the desertrarely ten miles in width-being alone traversable. But about long. 52° 20′ this strip itself fails. A rocky spur runs due south from the Elburz into the desert for a distance of some twenty or thirty miles, breaking the line of communication, and seeming at first sight to obstruct it completely. This, however, is not the case absolutely. The spur itself is penetrable by two passes, one where it joins the Elburz, which is the more difficult of the two, and another, further to the south, which is easier.2 The latter, now known as the Girduni Sudurrah pass, constitutes the famous 'Pylæ Caspiæ.' Through this pass alone can armies proceed from Armenia, Media, and Persia eastward, or from Turkestan, Khorasan, and Affghanistan into the more western parts of Asia. The position is therefore one of primary importance. It was to guard it that Rhages was built so near the eastern end of its territory. So long as it remained in the possession of Syria, Parthian aggression was checked. Rhagiana, the rest of Media, and the other provinces were safe, or nearly so. On the other hand, the loss of it to Parthia laid the eastern provinces open to her, and was at once almost equiva

1 Fraser, Khorasan, p. 291. Girduni Siyaluk. It is perhaps the 2 Ancient Monarchies, 1.s.c. ThePyle Caspia' of Pliny (H. N. vi. more northern pass is called the 14).

lent to the loss of all Rhagiana, which had no other natural protection. Now we find that Phraates surmounted the Gates,' and effected a lodgment in the plain country beyond them. He removed a portion of the conquered Mardians from their mountain homes to the city of Charax, which was on the western side of the Gates,1 probably on the site now occupied by the ruins known as Uewanikif.2 Their location in this strong post3 was a menace to the neighbouring town of Rhages, which can scarcely have maintained itself long against an enemy encamped at its doors. We are not informed, however, of any results which followed on the occupation of Charax during the life-time of Phraates. His reign lasted only seven years-from B.c. 181 to B.C. 174-and it is thus probable that he died before there was time for his second important conquest to have any further consequences.

Phraates had sufficient warning of his coming decease to make preparations with respect to a successor. Though he had several sons, some of whom were (we must suppose) of sufficient age to have ascended the throne, he left his crown to his brother, Mithridates. He felt, probably, that the State re

town indicates that it was guarded by a palisaded earthwork. On the strength of such palisaded places under the Parthians, see Polyb. x. 31, § 8. Tappo yàp oav TρTrai, πλάτος μὲν οὐχ ἕλαττον ἔχουσαι τριάκοντα πηχῶν, βάθος δὲ πεντεκαίδεκα ἐπὶ δὲ τοῖς χείλεσιν ἑκάστης χαρακώματα διπλᾶ ἐπέκειτο, καὶ τελευταῖον προτείχισμα δυνατόν.

4 Unless this had been the case, Justin would scarcely have dwelt so much upon the meritorious character of Phraates' action (Hist. Phil. xli. 5, ad fin.).

quired the direction of a firm hand, that war might at any time break out with either Syria or Bactria; while, if the career of conquest on which he had made Parthia enter, were to be pursued, he could trust his brother better than any of his sons to conduct aggressive expeditions with combined vigour and prudence. We shall see, as the history proceeds, how Mithridates justified his choice. Phraates would also appear to have borne his brother especial affection, since he takes the name of Philadelphus' (brother-loving) upon his coins.1 It must have been a satisfaction to him that he was able by his last act at once to consult for the good of his country, and to gratify a sentiment on which it is evident that he prided himself.

1 See Lindsay's Parthians, p. 136. The subjoined is from a coin of this monarch.

CHAPTER V.

Reign of Mithridates I. Position of Bactria and Syria at his accession. His first War with Bactria. His great Expedition against the Eastern Syrian provinces, and its results. His second war with Bactria, terminating in its conquest. Extent of his Empire. Attempt of Demetrius Nicator to recover the lost Provinces, fails. Captivity of Demetrius. Death of Mithridates.

'Mithridati, insignis virtutis viro, reliquit imperium (Phrahates)."

Justin, xli. 5.

THE reign of Mithridates I. is the most important in the Parthian history. Receiving from his brother Phraates a kingdom of but narrow dimensions, confined (as it would seem) between the city of Charax on the one side, and the river Arius, or Heri-rud, on the other, he transformed it, within the space of thirtyseven years (which was the time that his reign lasted), into a great and flourishing Empire. It is not too much to say that, but for him, Parthia might have

remained a mere petty State on the outskirts of the Syrian kingdom, and instead of becoming a rival to Rome, might have sunk shortly into obscurity and insignificance.

As commonly happens in the grand changes which constitute the turning-points of history, the way for Mithridates' vast successes was prepared by a long train of antecedent circumstances. To show how the rise of the Parthians to greatness in the middle of the second century before our era was rendered possible, we must turn aside once more from our proper subject and cast a glance at the condition of the two kingdoms between which Parthia stood, at the time when Mithridates ascended the throne.

The Bactrian monarchs, in their ambitious struggles to possess themselves of the tracts south of the Paropamisus, and extending from the Heri-rud to the Sutlej and the mouths of the Indus, overstrained the strength of their State, and by shifting the centre of its power injured irretrievably its principle of cohesion. As early as the reign of Demetrius 2 a tendency to disruption showed itself, Eucratidas having held the supreme power for many years in Bactria itself, while Demetrius exercised authority on the southern side of the mountains.3 It is true that at the death of Demetrius this tendency was to a certain extent checked, since Eucratidas was then able to extend his sway over almost the whole of the Bactrian territory.

1 See above, ch. iv. p. 62.

2 Bactria appears to have been from the first less centralized than Parthia. Strabo's expression that those who were intrusted with its government' (oi TETITEVμivo:) caused it to revolt, is remarkable, and implies a plurality of princes. The early coins are in accordance. Those of Diodotus II. show us two other contemporary princes, Antimachus and Agathocles, who at one time held their principalities under him, and at another time were independent. (See Num. Chron. New Series, vol. viii. Pl. 8,

Nos. 5-7; Pl. 9, Nos. 1-8.) Major Cunningham believes that about B.C. 230-225 there were four contemporary princes of what is commonly known as the Bactrian series. (Ibid. vol. ix. p. 128.) According to him, the union of the Greek power in the countries east of Parthia was first effected by Euthydemus, ab. B.C. 225.

3 Wilson, Ariana Antiqua, pp. 229, 234, &c. Lassen agrees, though a little doubtfully (Indische Alterthumskunde, vol. ii. pp. 304, 305).

4 According to Major Cunning