Chapter V: The Persians and Justinian's First War with Them (2)

On Easter Eve the Romans overtook the Persians, and the two armies encamped in sight of each other at a short distance from the town of Callinicus on the Euphrates. The day was observed as a strict fast, but nevertheless on the Sunday morning Belisarius drew out his forces and disposed them in order of battle. His infantry he placed on the left, so that their flank should be protected by the river. The centre was composed of cavalry, among whom he took up his own station, whilst the right wing was allocated to a body of Saracens under Arethas, a sheikh who had been induced to become an ally of the Empire as a counterpoise to the power of Alamundar. On the other side two divisions only were made, the Persians occupying the right and the Saracens the left. As usual the engagement was begun by the archers, who consumed nearly two-thirds of the day in emptying their quivers. The Persians, however, shot out weakly with relaxed strings, and their darts were to be seen continually leaping backwards after impinging on cuirasses, helmets, or shields. But the Byzantine bowmen, though much fewer in number, were more robust, and almost always succeeded in transfixing those whom they struck with their arrows. A determined charge on the Romans by the best troops of the enemy ensued, upon which the tribesmen led by Arethas, cowed by the superior prestige of Alamundar, fled almost without striking a blow. As a consequence Belisarius, with his cavalry, was surrounded on three sides, and subjected to a fierce attack which it was impossible to resist. A band of two thousand Isaurians, who had been among those most eager for a conflict, scarcely dared to use their weapons, and nearly all of them were slain on the spot. A large number of the centre, however, exhausted though they were with fasting, defended themselves strenuously, and inflicted great loss on their opponents. When at length Belisarius saw that there was no hope for the residue of his cavalry but annihilation, he drew them off rapidly to the left, and joined those of the infantry who still held their ground on the river's bank. There, with great presence of mind, he improvised a phalanx, dismounting himself and ordering all his horsemen to follow his example. With serried shields and projecting lances they formed an impenetrable mass which every effort of the enemy failed to break. Again and again the whole body of the Persian horse rode down upon the bristling phalanx; but the Romans drove them back with lance thrusts, and so terrified the animals by clashing their shields, that they shook their riders off. The conflict was only terminated by nightfall, when the Persians returned to their camp, and Belisarius, having obtained possession of a ferry-boat, transferred the remnant of the army to a safe retreat on an adjacent island of the river. Next day he summoned a batch of transports from Callinicus, and in a short time all were securely lodged within the town.[104]

Soon after the battle on the Euphrates Justinian recalled Belisarius to Constantinople and entrusted him with the organization of an expedition which he contemplated against the Vandals in the west. The chief command in the east then devolved on Sittas.[105] As for the Persian generals who had been opposed to Belisarius in the two leading engagements of the war, they incurred almost equal odium in the eyes of their royal master. The Mirrhanes was deprived of the rich insignia of an order of nobility which conferred a dignity second only to that of the throne; whilst Azarathes, who claimed the honours of a victorious general on his reappearance at court, could produce no evidence of his success and, after a muster of the troops, was upbraided by Cavades for having lost the half of his army.[106]

At this juncture Justinian seems almost to have despaired of obtaining a peace on any equitable terms from Persia, although he kept his legates, Rufinus and Hermogenes, on the confines of both empires in continual readiness to institute negotiations. He began, therefore, to devise some means of neutralizing the injurious effect of being in perpetual conflict with his impracticable neighbour. To provoke a hostile incursion against his antagonist from some remote frontier might force him to suspend his assaults on the Empire; whilst the serious interference with Byzantine commerce due to the import of silk across his enemy's dominions being in abeyance would disappear if the trade in that indispensable commodity could be diverted to some friendly route. The geographical and political situation of Aethiopia or Axum and the amicable relations of that kingdom with the Empire seemed to satisfy all the conditions essential to the success of this project. The civilization of Axum and part of its population had originally been derived from the Arabian province of Yemen, on the opposite side of the Red Sea. In the course of time the offspring prospered and turned upon its parent; and by the middle of the fourth century the Negus[107] of Axum had become the overlord of his less powerful neighbour, the king of the Homerites or Himyarites, as the inhabitants of that district of Arabia were called in this age. Christian missions began to penetrate these regions shortly after the reign of Constantine, and at the present time the Axumites were enthusiastic votaries of that religion and of Rome. Himyar, however, was full of Jews who had fled before Hadrian and his predecessors after the subjection of Palestine and the destruction of Jerusalem, and, therefore, of religious dissension; and the championship of the Cross more than once furnished an occasion for the Aethiopian despot to carry his arms into the Arabian kingdom for the maintenance of his rather precarious suzerainty. Only recently, in the reign of Justin (_c._ 524), the Negus of the day, Elesbaas,[108] had crossed the gulf, expelled a Jewish ruler, and established Esimphaeus, a Christian, in his stead.[109]

To Elesbaas, therefore, Justinian determined to apply, and forthwith detached an ambassador named Julian to enlist his aid against Persia. The embassy, provided with a letter and suitable presents, took ship for Alexandria, navigated the Nile to Coptos, crossed the desert to Berenice, and from thence sailed down the Red Sea to Adule.[110] The Negus was transported with joy as soon as he heard that a party of Roman delegates was approaching Axum, and advanced from his capital to meet them sustained by all the excess of barbaric state. He was standing on a lofty car adorned with plates of gold, which was drawn by four elephants. His guards crowded around him, each one armed with a pair of gilded spears and a small gilt shield, and a company of musicians blew with exultant strains on their shrill pipes. The dusky potentate himself was almost devoid of clothing proper, but was decked from head to foot with a profusion of precious ornaments. On his head he wore a white turban interwoven with gold thread and four golden chains hung from it on each side. A linen mantle weighted with pearls and golden nails, open in front, flowed from his shoulders; and a kilt seamed with precious metal was dependent from his girdle. A necklace and bracelets of gold, with arms similar to those borne by his guards, completed his equipment.[111]

Julian knelt and presented his letter, but was immediately bidden to rise, whilst the Negus kissed the seal of the missive, and listened to its contents as read by an interpreter. He at once promised compliance with all Justinian's requests; an army of his vassal Saracens should march against the Sassanian realm, and the cargoes of silk from Malabar should be diverted from the Persian Gulf to be discharged at Adule.[112] After the lapse of a year another envoy was despatched from Constantinople, and Nonnosus, one of a family of legates, familiarized with these regions by constant visits, traversed not only Axum, but Yemen, in order to stimulate the execution of these important schemes.[113] In the end, however, the project failed of achievement; the tribes of Himyar shrunk from entering on a long and arduous journey over the sandy wastes to attack an enemy whom they believed to be more bellicose than themselves, while the shipmasters could not be induced to avoid the Persian ports, where they found eager buyers for all the silk they could procure.[114] The death of Elesbaas occurred shortly afterwards, but not before an interior revolt had freed Himyar for a time from the Aethiopian supremacy.[115]

In the next phase of the war, martial activity centred around Martyropolis, a fortified town of Roman Armenia, situated on the river Nymphius. A considerable Persian army, under several veteran generals, beset the stronghold with all the engines proper to a determined siege in the warfare of the period. At the same time Cavades, octogenarian though he was, resolute in his purpose to do all the damage possible to his adversaries, provoked an artificial irruption of the Huns into Roman territory, and opened the Caspian Gates to a great host of those barbarians. At his instigation they carried their depredations rapidly to the south, and in the autumn of 531 effected a junction with the Persian forces around Martyropolis. Buzes and Bessas commanded the garrison of the town, but without confidence in their powers of resistance to the assault; for not only were the walls easily surmountable in many places, but the beleaguered were ill supplied with sustenance, and with warlike machines to repel the assaults of the enemy.[116] Nor had the Byzantines any troops in the field with whom they could hope to raise the siege; and Sittas, though posted at only one day's march from the scene of hostilities, feared to approach nearer with the slender army at his disposal.[117] From time to time successful sallies were made by the besieged, and Bessas, who was a bold cavalry leader, now, as on former occasions, found opportunities of inflicting considerable loss on the foe; but nevertheless it was felt that a crisis disastrous to the Romans could not long be delayed.[118] In this impass a stratagem was concerted and carried out effectively, which blunted the ardour of the siege and eventually saved the town. As in all ages, it was the practice to maintain spies in an enemy's camp; and between both nations there was a habitual interchange of renegades who were anxious to betray the secrets of their country, attracted by the substantial rewards which generally accrued to such treason. A man of this class was now at hand, one whose reliability had been tested by the Emperor himself, and he was instructed to reveal to the Persian generals with professed good faith his pretended discovery that the Huns, corrupted by Byzantine gold, only awaited an opportune moment to change sides in their warfare. The spy executed his commission faithfully, and his communication was listened to with consternation by the military council.[119] The Orientals, distrustful of their uncongenial allies, relaxed their energies, and the siege was protracted until the severity of the weather compelled a cessation of arms for the season. The Persians gladly agreed to a truce and retired into winter quarters, but the Huns, now freed from control, began to work their way towards the south with Antioch as their goal, plundering every assailable habitation which lay in their track. They were pursued unremittingly by Bessas, who cut up marauding bands, captured their spoils, and finally succeeded in chasing the survivors out of the country.[120]

In the meantime an event had occurred which produced an immediate change in the relations of the two empires, and virtually ended the war before the advent of spring called for a resumption of hostilities. Early in September Cavades was suddenly prostrated by illness, whereupon he summoned Chosroes, and caused him to be crowned hastily at his bedside. A few days afterwards he expired, at the age of eighty-two in the forty-fourth year of his reign.[121] As usual in Oriental successions the new Shah was unable to seat himself firmly on the throne without making away with several of his near relatives who formed a nucleus around whom malcontents might cluster.[122] Preoccupied, therefore, with his domestic affairs, he was anxious to be relieved from the onus of a foreign war, and signified shortly to the Roman legates his willingness to negotiate a treaty.[123] Rufinus was credited with being a peculiarly grateful personage to Chosroes owing to his having consistently advised Cavades, during his long intimacy with him, to elevate his third son to the throne. It was also reported that the Persian queen-mother was in secret sympathy with Christianity and, therefore, used her influence over her son to promote peaceful relations with the Byzantines.[124] But the lessons of the war had not been lost on Chosroes, and he felt strong enough to impose conditions so exacting that the Roman plenipotentiaries were unable to accept them on their own responsibility. Invasion of the empire in force had been the distinctive feature of every campaign and, while Persian territory had been subjected only to some desultory raids, the brunt of the war had been borne by the Byzantines on their own ground. Under an obligation to perform the double journey in seventy days, Rufinus posted to Constantinople to hold a special conference with Justinian. He returned with a virtual consent to all the effective demands of Chosroes, and in less than a year after the death of Cavades a treaty was ratified under the reassuring title of "the Perpetual Peace." By this convention the substantial captures made by each party were to be exchanged; the fugitive Iberians were to be allowed the option of residing peacefully in their own country or of remaining under the protection of Justinian; Dara was not to be demolished, but the military Duke of Mesopotamia was to remove his headquarters from thence to an unimportant town at some distance from the frontier;[125] and the Caspian Gates were to be left in the sole charge of Persia. The two last articles were concessions on the part of the Shahinshah, to counterbalance which the Romans agreed to pay an indemnity of one hundred and ten centenaries of gold (£440,000).[126] Rufinus deposited the amount in specie at Nisibis, and the war was thus terminated with some military glory to the Byzantines, but with no inconsiderable loss of their material possessions, which accrued for the most part to the advantage of the Orientals.

During the whole of this period the barbarians to the north of the Danube and Euxine were kept in a state of active commotion by various influences; and, if at any moment the countless wild hordes, who peopled that immense region, could have been moved by a unanimous impulse to hurl their combined force against the Empire, it seems impossible but that the Byzantine administration must have succumbed at once and finally to the irresistible shock. But there were always three forces in being which co-operated to avert such a catastrophe, and saved the Empire for many centuries from sudden annihilation. Its lengthened preservation in this connection was due to the diverse powers of arms, of wealth, and of religion. Conversion to Christianity was continually inspiring a proportion of these semi-savage races with a desire to enter into amicable relations with the Roman Emperor, in whom they saw the prime source of the mystical lore which they had just been taught to regard with awe. Rich presents were despatched to the most accessible of the barbarian rulers, who were thus induced to pledge their allegiance to the Byzantine state.[127] These various influences not only protected the Empire from many impending assaults, but, by animating the barbarians with invidious feelings against each other, often caused dissentient tribes to engage in the work of mutual self-destruction. Lastly, the residue who actually crossed the frontier with hostile intent were met by the Masters of Soldiers, and with varying success checked in their advance, or cut to pieces.

The influence of religion, at the same time conjunctive and disruptive, has already been exemplified in connection with Lazica and Iberia; and a couple of nearly similar instances, occurring shortly after the accession of Justinian, will be noticed explicitly in a future chapter.[128] An illustration of the advantage derived by the Emperor from the judicious bestowal of treasure on barbarian potentates is also brought before us during this war with Persia.[129] Two Hunnish kings, subsidized by Cavades, were on the march to join the Persian army with an auxiliary force amounting to twenty thousand men. But a queen of the Sabirian Huns, named Boarex, who had been the recipient of Justinian's liberality, was able to put a hundred thousand of her nation under arms. This martial female did not hesitate to attack her kindred; but, falling on them before they could reach their destination, destroyed the expeditionary force, slew one of the leaders, and sent the other to Constantinople, where he was impaled on the shore at Sycae, by order of the Emperor.[130] On the Illyrian frontier the Masters of the Forces in that region were in almost perpetual conflict with barbarian raiders. Previous to 529 the command on the Danube had been entrusted to Ascum, a Christian Hun, but, being captured by a marauding band of his own race during a skirmish, he was carried off and permanently retained by them in their native abodes. He was succeeded by Mundus, a Gepœd of royal race, who had formerly been in the service of Italy. After the death of Theodoric, however, he placed his sword at the disposal of Justinian, to whom he proved a faithful servant not only in the defence of Illyricum, but shortly afterwards at a critical period of his reign in the capital.[131]

[1] The minute description of Justinian's personal appearance is due to Procopius (Anecd., 8), and Malala (xviii, p. 425), whose descriptions seem to correspond fairly. There are several representations of Justinian, but it is doubtful whether any of them rise to actual portraiture. Those found on a large gold medal formerly in a museum at Paris (stolen 1835) were probably the best (reproduced by Isambert, _op. cit._; Diehl, _op. cit._, p. 23). He appears in the great mosaics at Ravenna (see p. 91), and also in a half-length figure in St. Apollinare of the same town. Further there is a MS. sketch at CP. (Mordtmann, _op. cit._, p. 65). In addition there is the current coinage, especially the copper, on which his image is impressed. Generally the face is pronouncedly round, but, one and all, these likenesses are too crude to convey any physiognomical information. See also p. 308.

[2] Procopius, Anecd., 8. He relates that after the butchery of Domitian all his statues were broken to pieces, but his wife afterwards fitted the fragments of his body together and caused a new figure to be sculptured from them. There is an almost perfect statue of Domitian in the Vatican, which may be the one he alludes to, if there is any truth in his story.

[3] Jn. Malala, xviii, p. 425; Chron. Paschal, an. 566. "You would have taken him for a man with the mind of a sheep," says Procopius, Anecd., 13.

[4] His character and manners can be collected from Procopius (Anecd., 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 22, etc.) and Zonaras, xiv, 8. His personal influence is well illustrated by the incident already related (p. 303) of his rescuing a patrician from the mob although at the time he was only a Candidate; and by his deliberate _mésalliance_ with Theodora being permitted without a murmur from Church or State. His stolid conviction may be compared to that of Robespierre, of whom, when he first began to speak on public affairs, Mirabeau remarked, "That young man will go far; he believes every word he says."

[5] Procopius, Anecd., 8; 13. In many of his enactments he emphasizes his unremitting assiduity in the interest of his subjects, _e.g._: "We shun no difficulties, continually watching, fasting, and labouring for our subjects, even beyond what can be borne by the human frame"; Nov. xxx, 11; cf. viii, _pf._; lxxx, _pf._, etc.

[6] Procopius, Anecd., 22. "He was excessively senseless and like a dull ass that follows whoever holds the bridle," _ibid._, 8. "As to his opinions he was lighter than dust, and at the mercy of those who wished to urge him to one side or the other," _ibid._, 13.

[7] There is but one representation of Theodora, that in the companion mosaic to the one above-mentioned at Ravenna, but the face is too unfinished and expressionless to give any idea of her features or character.

[8] Procopius, Anecd., 12.

[9] Procopius, Anecd., 15.

[10] Procopius, Anecd., 15. This Porphyrio, such was the popular name bestowed on the monster, must have been a cachalot or sperm whale, which inhabits tropical and sub-tropical seas. It grows to a length of 50 or 60 feet. The males fight viciously among themselves. Small ships have been damaged by the animal when provoked by an attack.

[11] Nov. viii, 1. Officials, on taking office, had to swear to Justinian and Theodora conjointly; _ibid._, _jusjur._; cf. Nov. xxviii, 5; xxix, 4; xxx, 6, 11. Zonaras remarks, "In the time of Justinian there was not a monarchy, but a dual reign. His partner for life was not less potent, perhaps even more so than himself," xiv, 6; cf. Paul Silent., i, 62. The reign has been compared to that of Louis XIV; but the character of that monarch was more evident in Theodora than in her husband.

[12] "In fact she was much abler than he was and highly ingenious in finding new and varied expedients." Zonaras, _loc. cit._

[13] As Messalina, the elder Faustina, Soaemias, etc.; see chap. iv.

[14] Procopius, Anecd., 2.

[15] _Ibid._, 15.

[16] Procopius, Anecd., 30.

[17] _Ibid._

[18] _Ibid._, 10; Evagrius, iv, 10; Victor Ton.

[19] See Bevan's House of Seleucus, Lond., 1902.

[20] The campaigns of Trajan are very imperfectly recorded in the only extant account, that of Dion Cassius as preserved in the careless epitome of Xiphilinus; Zonaras, xi, 21. It is certain that he took the twin capitals of Parthia, Seleucia and Ctesiphon, which faced each other from opposite sides of the Euphrates, and advanced to the Persian Gulf. He marched into Arabia, but the evidence that he penetrated to the Indian Ocean, as Tillemont thinks, is insufficient.

[21] The capture of Seleucia by Avidius Cassius (165), and his brutal massacre of 300,000 of its inhabitants, mostly Greeks, is often alluded to as an irreparable blow to Western civilization in the East; Dion Cas., lxxi, 2, etc. Severus took Ctesiphon in 199; Herodian; Hist. August. In 283 Carus also took Ctesiphon; Hist. August.; Aurelius Vict. Under Diocletian, Galerius extended the Empire beyond the Tigris; Aurel. Vict.; Eutropius, ix.

[22] See Plutarch's account of the affair and his general remarks on it; Vit. Alex.

[23] In the vicinity of Shiraz; described by modern travellers as a garden of fertility.

[24] Most information as to the rise, etc., of Ardeshír (Artakhshathr on coins, that is, Artaxerxes as adapted to their language by the Greeks), will be found in Tabari with Nöldeke's commentary; _op. cit._; cf. Zotenberg, _op. cit._, ii, 40. The great value of Nöldeke's book consists not so much in the flimsy text as in his notes and excursuses which bring together all collateral information to be found in other writers of the period. Zotenberg's version is, of course, from the Persian, the translation of a translation.

[25] The Great Salt Desert in the interior of Persia is somewhat triangular, each of the sides measuring about 400 miles.

[26] Modern Orientalists are of opinion that the pictures of Persian life given by James Morier (Hajji Baba of Ispahan, 1824, etc.) may be applied without much loss of truth even to the age of the Achaemenians. When we reflect that till 1888 Persia had no railway, and now only eight miles, the verisimilitude of the statement will be apparent.

[27] See the first Fargard of the Vendidâd where the "Kine's soul," representing mankind, bewails her hard lot before the supreme being. Generally the primitive conditions of life in Iran are well set forth by Max Duncker, Hist. of Antiquity, Lond. 1881, vol. v.

[28] His actual date is unknown, and his existence at any time not certain, but Duncker surmises this period.

[29] The Iranian mythology is summarized at length by Duncker, but the person of Zoroaster is altogether shadowy, and his date can only be fixed by conjecture. He is, of course, done away with altogether by some Orientalists, _e.g._ Darmsteter. In later times, as among the modern Persians (Parsees), the names of the opposing gods were abbreviated to Ormuzd and Ahriman.

[30] The Persian Bible is written in a language without a name, and, it may be added, without an alphabetical character. The name _Zend_, however, is now firmly attached to it among Western scholars through a mistake of the first investigators, who, always finding it coupled with _Avesta_, thought it must apply to the language of the sacred text. It actually means commentary. Zend is a sister tongue of that spoken in the same age across the Indus, and the oldest specimens (the Gáthas of the Avesta) by slight systematic alterations can be turned into good old Sanskrit. The alphabet applied to it, as now preserved, is that of the Middle Persian or Pahlavi, which was the language spoken by the Sassanians. Old Persian, the speech of Darius and Xerxes, was written in cuneiform (Behistun inscription, etc.), like the impressions on the well-known clay tablets, etc., of the long-previous literature of Babylonia. The Avesta originally consisted of twenty-one _nasks_ or books, but less than a quarter is now extant. There is, however, an epitome of it in the Dinkard, a religious compilation of the eighth century. The book was unknown to the Greeks and Romans, but Pausanias (v, 27) mentions that the Magi had a volume from which they read. Darmsteter (Sacred Books of the East, Lond., 1895, Introd. to Vendidâd) considers that the composition is almost in its entirety of a date subsequent to Alexander. The sacred books of the Parsees, as far as they have been translated, are to be found in Max Müller's series (Lond., 1880, etc.), just mentioned, vols. iv, xxiii, xxxi (Zend-Avesta), and v, xviii, xxiv, xxxviii (religious treatises in Pahlavi).

[31] Mithra, so-named, long enjoyed a supremacy among the Aryans both in India and Persia. Spenta Aramaiti is one of the Amesha Spentas (later Amshaspands, that is, "Holy Immortals," or Council of Ormuzd, but, although they appear in the Avesta, Darmsteter (_loc. cit._) argues a Platonic and, therefore, late origin for them. Thus Vohu Manô ("Good Thought"), their chief and the premier of Ormuzd, appears to be an exact counterpart of the Philonic Logos. Anahita stands for the Vedic Varuna, the waters of the sky, but the name is that of the Babylonian Venus, and her attributes are partly of the concupiscent type.

[32] The Vendidâd ("laws against the evil ones") is the nask which contains all the legislation respecting rites and ceremonies, offences, crimes, etc., punishments to be inflicted, means of expiation, etc. Like parts of the Pentateuch, it is all in the form of a dialogue between the prophet and the Deity.

[33] These Dakhmas, or "Towers of Silence," for the disposal of the dead are well-known to the Anglo-Indians who have resided at Bombay, which almost all Parsees, the present-day Zoroastrians, have adopted as their native city. They number about 60,000.

[34] This account is due to Agathias, ii, 23; cf. Herodotus, i, 138.

[35] Agathias, ii, 24; Herodotus, _loc. cit._ Contrary to former belief (Rawlinson, etc.), the Parthians were pious Mazdeites, as Darmsteter has shown. Thus, when Tiridates visited Nero, he and his retinue, including several priests, journeyed overland to avoid defiling the sea; Justin, xli; Pliny, Hist. Nat., xxx, 17.

[36] One Shah, Balâsh, was, in fact, dethroned by the Mohbeds (Magi) for having erected public bath-houses; Jos. Stylites, _op. cit._ (Wright).

[37] Xenophon, Oeconom., iv, 13; Xerxes, on his way to Greece, arriving at a handsome plane tree, adorned it with jewels of gold, and left one of his personal guards as a custodian of it; Herodotus, vii, 31.

[38] The Bareshnûm, or great ceremony of purification, lasted nine days and consisted chiefly in the systematic application of _nirung_ or _gomez_ (urine of kine) to different parts of the body; see West's translation of the rubric, Sacr. Bks. of the East, xviii, 431.

[39] Vendidâd, xiii, 24 (63). The manslaughterer got off with sixty stripes, but the bad feeder became a _peshotanu_ and received two hundred, the maximum, it seems, actually inflicted.

[40] _Ibid._, xiv, 1; iv, 40 (106).

[41] Vendidâd, xiv, 5 (9). Part of the expiation for the murder of an otter was to kill 10,000 of every sort of noxious animal. The punishments, or tasks imposed in lieu of, are sometimes so extravagant, that they can only be intended to emphasize the heinousness of the sin, a useful principle to elevate the authority of the priesthood; cf. Herodotus, i, 140.

[42] Vendidâd, viii, 26 (74); 74 (233); xviii, 61 (123); cf. iii, 38 (130); iv, 47 (130). As will be seen from these passages a proselyte to Mazdeism began a new life with a clean slate. Thus a member of an alien faith could commute the severest penalty by announcing himself as a convert to the religion of Zerdusht.

[43] Vendidâd, xiv, 2; cf. Herodotus, i, 137; vii, 194. Punishment was inflicted with a _sraosha_ (sort of whip), and each stripe was valued at six rupees. In practice the maximum was 200 stripes for a _peshotanu_ or culprit of the worst class, whatever the nature of the crime, but when it was really meant to decree the death penalty the allotted number was much greater, even up to 10,000; see Darmsteter, _op. cit._, p. lxxxv. In the entourage of the monarch, however, the same cruel punishments were maintained as have always been associated with Oriental despotism, viz., flaying alive (Ammianus, xxiii, 6; Agathias, iv, 23), and even "the boat" (Plutarch, Artaxerxes; Damascius, Vit. Isidori).

[44] See Herodotus, iii, 81; Plutarch, Artaxerxes.

[45] Phraates V of Parthia. His mother was Thea Urania Musa, an Italian slave girl presented to his father by Augustus; Josephus, Antiq., xviii, 2. The relations of Parysatis to Artaxerxes and of Sisygambis to Darius Cod. were very close, but are not known to have been actually conjugal.

[46] These filio-maternal marriages have been generally discredited by modern historians (Rawlinson, Oriental Monarchies, ii, 351; even partly by Max Duncker, _op. cit._, v, 220) through their not being in possession of all the classical evidence and having apparently none of the Oriental. Probably the first to make the practice known in the West was Quintus Curtius, and lastly Agathias. But the evidence of Chrysostom alone, a Syrian reared on the borders of Persia, would be conclusive. As usual, he anatomizes the subject. Preaching against sexual abandonment, he says: "Love, you maintain, is not a matter of will.... Whence does it arise, then? From a beautiful form which strikes the wound, you answer. Your excuse is an idle one.... Were not Joseph and David handsome, the latter especially so in the eyes, which is the most attractive style of beauty? But was any man enamoured of them? By no means, for love does not arise from mere admiration. Many have mothers most distinguished for their beauty, but do their sons, therefore, fall in love with them? Perish the thought! They admire them, but do not yield to a disgraceful passion. Ah! you will urge, this is a law of nature. Of what nature, tell me? Because they are our mothers, you say. Do you not know that the Persians, without any compulsion, cohabit with their mothers? Not one or two, but the whole nation. Whence it is evident that this disease is not inspired by beauty, but by a vice of the mind"; In Epist. ii ad Cor. Hom. vii, 6 (in Migne, x, 451). Contemporary Parsees also wish to repudiate the idea that their forefathers solemnized these incestuous nuptials, and treat it as a libel of the Greeks, as modern Mazdeism yields to no closer union than that of first cousins. The whole question, however, of consanguineous marriage has been threshed out from the evidence of the Pahlavi texts by West (Sacr. Bks. of the East, xviii, 389 _et seq._), who shows how strenuously the Mohbeds laboured to inculcate the practice as a pious duty. A special term in Pahlavi, _Khvêtûk-das_, meaning literally "a giving of one's own," was applied to it. There is no clear reference to the custom in the extant part of the Avesta, but in the Dinkard epitome (ix, 60; Sacr. Bks. of the East, xxxvii) great stress is laid on the merit of adhering to it, and in the same theological compilation a long chapter (iii, 82, 431) is devoted to the defence and exposition of Khvêtûk-das. As West observes, however, it is evident from the amount of space and argument expended on the subject that the priesthood had some difficulty in bending an unwilling laity to comply with their injunctions. We may note that the Persians were not the only race addicted to such marriages. According to Strabo (IV, v, 4), they were habitual among the Irish of his time ("mothers and sisters"); and even the aboriginal Macedonians favoured them, so that when the _Oedipus Rex_ of Sophocles was played in that country the audience jeered at the distress of the titular character. An amusing dialogue between actor and audience then ensued; see Tertullian, Ad Nat., 16.

[47] Quintus Curtius, viii, 4 (19).

[48] Herodotus, iii, 68, 88; Athenaeus, xiii, 3, etc.; Ammianus, xxiii, 6. As usual in the East, women were kept out of sight; Plutarch, Themistocles. Still, Queen Statira used to drive about openly in public; _ibid._, Artaxerxes. Cf. Max Duncker, _op. cit._, v, 219.

[49] See Gardner's Parthian Coinage, Lond., 1877; cf. Mordtmann, Zeits. f. Numis., iv, vii.

[50] See the letter of Tansar to the king of Tabaristân (Ilyrcania); Journal asiatique, 1894, i (text and French transl.). This, according to Darmsteter, is the earliest and most authentic document of Zoroastrianism. The best MS. is in the East India House. From it we learn that under the Parthians the unity of Iran was gradually dissolved into a number of principalities, in which each king claimed a practical independence and set up a fire-altar of his own. Ardeshír extinguished all these subordinate fire-altars and made himself supreme in his capital of Istakhr. The letter has been largely interpolated at a later date, especially by the long apologue of the King of the Apes. Partly against Darmsteter see Mills' Zoroastrianism, 1905, etc.

[51] He treated the traditions of the old religion pretty freely and abolished whatever did not accord with his scheme of restoring the empire of the Persians; _ibid._

[52] Properly Shahpûr, meaning "king's son."

[53] See Darmsteter, _op. cit._, p. xlvii. The story of Arda Viraf's visit to heaven and hell (part of the lost Spend Nask) under the influence of a narcotic in the presence of a great conventicle of the Magi, in search of spiritual guidance for the restoration of Mazdeism, seems to be a mere legend to be referred to the sixth century rather than to the times and intention of Ardeshír. It has been cited as serious history by some former writers.

[54] Letter of Tansar, _ut supra_, cf. Herodian, vi, 3. H. is generally treated as a romancer, but in this instance he is confirmed by independent evidence. His statement that Ardeshír had the best of it in a great battle with Alex. Severus is rejected in favour of that of Lampridius (Hist. Aug.), who says the Roman was the victor. The war on this occasion, as often subsequently, was probably quite indecisive.

[55] See Sayce's Babylonians, etc., Lond., 1900, and other works of that class which condense the results of the excavations in progress on that site.

[56] See p. 267. Fragments of the Manichaean Bible recently discovered in Central Asia show that Mani was a native of Babylon.

[57] Sozomen, ii, 9; Theodoret, v, 39. Some were partly flayed, on the face and the hands, or the back. Others were thrown bound into pits with mice, etc. The first of these persecutions seems to have sprung from the religious fervour caused by Sapor's zeal for the faith; the second was originated by a fanatical Christian bishop, who attacked and destroyed a Pyreum or Fire-temple. See Hoffmann's Akt. Pers. Märt., Leipsic, 1880.

[58] Asseman, Bibl. Orient., iii, 2. They had the ear of the Shah as against any of the Orthodox in Persia; John Eph. Com. (Land, etc.), p. 52.

[59] Nöldeke, _op. cit._, p. 145; Zotenberg, _op. cit._, ii, 148. They were soiled by her menstrual flux, she said. To touch anything of the kind would have subjected him to a ceremony of purification and, perhaps, a flogging; Vendidâd, xviii, 5. The scene reminds us of that in _The Merry Wives of Windsor_, where Falstaff is carried out in the foul-clothes basket. Procopius relates that she changed clothes with him, and the Shah walked out disguised as a woman; De Bel. Pers., i, 6.

[60] This was not his first sojourn with the Hephthalites. His father Peroz, who ultimately perished in a battle with these Huns, had left him in Bactria as a hostage for the payment of an indemnity. In Tabari the story goes that on his journey thither he stopped incognito at the house of a noble (N.) or peasant (Z.), where he was accommodated with a daughter of the family as an informal wife. When Balâsh was dethroned (see p. 379), he returned to take up the succession by the same route and found that the girl had become the mother of a boy, the same who was afterwards known as Chosroes, his favourite son (see p. 314).

[61] "Hence he set the lower against the upper classes; wretches of every sort were mingled with the best blood; and it became usual for those who coveted other people's goods to seize on them; for the disorderly to riot around; and for libertines to gratify their passions and approach the noblest women, whom previously they never had a thought of intimacy with"; Tabari, p. 154 (N.). This passage with the context is not in Zotenberg.

[62] The details of this affair are incompletely known. The Greeks seem never to have heard of Mazdak, but confound his followers with the Manichaeans. The above account is based on that of Theophanes, modified so as to accord with Nöldeke's views; _op. cit._, p. 457 (Excurs.). He thinks the surname of Nushirvan ("the blessed") was bestowed on Chosroes for the part he played in this massacre. Existing Manichaeans were also involved in it.

[63] Theophylact. Sim., iv, 7; cf. Athenaeus, xii, 8.

[64] Nöldeke, _op. cit._, p. 221. He was concealed with "clothes" until he settled himself in a dignified position. But in Zotenberg (p. 205) the clothes become merely a covering to keep the dust off the jewels. Such differences are perpetual throughout the two versions of Tabari. On coins and sculptures the Shah wears a crown surmounted by a pedunculated ball of considerable size. At the siege of Amida (359) Sapor wore a golden ram's head instead of a crown; Ammianus, xix, 1. Theophylactus (who is noted for his turgidity) gives a description of Hormidz IV sitting in state on his throne (590). "He was clad with a regal robe of precious material. His tiara of gold and jewels was brilliant with the effulgence of carbuncles. A profusion of pearls glittered around the crest, scintillating on a sea of smaragdite, so that the eyes were almost blinded by the dazzling exuberance of the gems. His trousers, a priceless sample of the weaver's art, were embroidered on cloth of gold"; iv, 3. Cedrenus (i, 721) also furnishes some curious details as what was found when Heraclius broke into the treasure city of Gazaca and rifled the palace of Chosroes Parviz (622). The contents of a private fire-temple astonished them. "On entering the spherical chamber he found the impious effigy of Chosroes sitting, as it were, in the heavens among the sun, moon, and stars, whom the fanatic worshipped as gods. Sceptre-bearing angels stood around, and the wretch had devised machines which discharged water like rain, and emitted a sound as of thunder. All this was consumed by fire."

[65] Ammianus, xxiii, 6; cf. Menander, Leg., p. 335; Theophylact., iv, 8; letters in which Chosroes, Nush. and Parviz, assume all their titles.

[66] Herodotus, vii, 54; Q. Curtius, v, 1 (20).

[67] Nöldeke, _op. cit._, p. 222; Zotenberg, _op. cit._, p. 231, etc.

[68] As evidenced notably in the struggle between the successful rebel general, Bahram, and Chosroes Parviz; Theophylact. Sim., iv.

[69] Herodotus, vii, 83; Procopius, De Bel. Pers., i, 14, etc.

[70] Jn. Lydus, De Magist., iii, 34.

[71] Herodotus, i, 136. Jn. Lydus (_loc. cit._) says the whole nation was trained to arms, and always ready to enter on a campaign.

[72] Tabari (N.), p. 245. In Zotenberg (p. 228) the number is given as eight score, which would probably weigh the horse too heavily. Some injunctions as to armour are given in Vendidâd, xiv (32). Here also thirty arrows are recommended. For slingers, thirty stones each man is the fixed number. The horse and his rider were so well shielded with metal that Ammianus speaks of them as an "iron cavalry"; xix, 1; cf. xxv, i.

[73] Ammianus, xxv, 1; Procopius, De Bel. Goth., iv, 13; Aedif., ii, 1.

[74] In Zotenberg, the reason why Kavádh was led to reform the taxation is accounted for by an anecdote (p. 241). One day while hunting he became separated from his party, and sat down to rest himself near a peasant's cottage. While there, he noticed a child bringing two or three grapes to its mother, who at once seized them and with great concern ran to attach them again to the vine, exclaiming that the inspector had not yet been round to assess the amount of the crop. The absurdity and harshness of the tithe law was thus practically exemplified to the Shah. Both versions relate that a strange scribe who ventured to dispute the soundness of the proposed financial change in an assembly convened to hear it announced, being convicted of starting a futile objection by Cavades, was thereupon, at a nod from the monarch, belaboured by his fellow scribes with their ink-horns till he expired. His point was that the relations of the land and its owners would vary continually, and he was met by the statement that there would be a yearly survey to readjust the burdens.

[75] Tabari (N.), pp. 152, 222; _Ibid._ (Z.), p. 241.

[76] Zachariah Myt., ix, 6.

[77] Besides the objective evidence, there is a direct statement of the fact; Theophylactus Sim., v, 6.

[78] The practical application of the doctrine of the Avesta has been described at considerable length by Max Duncker (_op. cit._, v), but the school of Darmsteter would aver that his exposition applies with more accuracy to the age of the Sassanians than to that of the Achaemenians, whom alone he deals with.

[79] Some remains, almost certainly those of fire-temples, exist, but they are architecturally insignificant, being, in fact, merely low stone towers a few feet square. The interior was only a cell with just room enough to accommodate a small altar, on which a perpetual fire was kept up; see Ferguson, Hist. Archit., Lond., 1874, i, 202; cf. Perrot and Chipiez, Persian Art, i, 892.

[80] The chief work which gives representations of Sassanian architecture is that of Flandin and Coste, Voyage en Perse, Paris, 1851. Many have been copied by Rawlinson, _op. cit._

[81] About twenty miles due east of the northern end of the Dead Sea.

[82] See Tristram's Land of Moab, Lond., 1873, and for a restoration, Ferguson, _op. cit._, i, 392. The slabs have now been removed to a Berlin museum, where they are attributed to the Ghassanides, an Arab dynasty.

[83] See the reproductions in Flandin and Coste, etc., _op. cit._

[84] The work on which the well-known poem of Firdausi was founded (_c._ 1,000). There is much theological exegesis in Pahlavi, but, except the Avesta and its commentaries, this is post-Mohammedan. Much of it has been translated by West, as stated above. The chief works in the collection are the Dinkard, a sheaf of treatises in nine books; the Bundahish, or "Story of Creation," a sort of Iranian Genesis, but of greater length; and the Sad-Dar, a controversial work, in which the follower of Mazda is taught to refute the "twaddle" of Christians and, guardedly, of Mohammedans.

[85] For the details of this war we have the first-rate account of Procopius (De Bel. Pers., i, 12-22), an eye-witness of a great part of it. Additional information on some events can be gleaned from Zachariah Myt. (ix, 1-7) and Jn. Malala, both nearly contemporary. The later chronicles are practicably negligible.

[86] Jn. Malala, xviii, 441; the inference may be drawn by comparing the passage with Procopius.

[87] Zachariah Myt., ix, 2. The exact wording of the sentence is doubtful, but the intention is clear.

[88] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 13.

[89] Malala calls him the eldest son, but in Procopius Caoses is the name given to the eldest; _loc. cit._, 11; see p. 314.

[90] Hunnish Foederati. According to Ammianus (xxxi, 2) they almost lived on horseback, often not dismounting even to sleep.

[91] See Oman (_op. cit._, 28) for a plan of the battle with remarks. It does not quite accord with the phraseology of Procopius, but I find it impossible to understand him in any other way.

[92] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 14.

[93] The enemy, says Procopius, kept the Romans standing in line all the forenoon to prevent their having their midday meal; they themselves did not eat till sundown.

[94] Bury (_op. cit._) makes him only twenty-five, but later, in 562, represents him as being near seventy. His age can only be guessed at from Procopius, De Bel. Pers., i, 12.

[95] If we adopt Oman's interpretation of the tactics of Belisarius (which requires the interchange of "+aristera+" and "+dexia+") the subsequent evolutions of the battle become quite clear. Following the text as it stands it seems to me that they would have been impossible. But in the first case "left" is due to an evidently stupid emendation of Maltretus ("+dexia+" now restored by Haury).

[96] Gold mines worked by the Persians were at Pharangium, and the place was betrayed by the commandant in order that he might embezzle the stock of ore which he happened to have in hand; Procopius, _loc. cit._, 15. Jn. Malala (p. 455) seems to be partly in conflict with the above. He says the output was formerly divided between both nations, but in the time of Anastasius was wholly ceded to the Romans.

[97] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 15.

[98] Jn. Malala, xviii, p. 430: "He became engaged to her at the house of Antiochus, near the Hippodrome." This was probably an Imperial appanage or the house of some noble to whose guardianship the sisters had been confided on the elevation of Theodora.

[99] Cf. Procopius (_loc. cit._, 16), with Malala (pp. 449-450). He harked back to the old quarrel with Anastasius over the loan; see p. 176.

[100] Jn. Malala, pp. 445, 455; Procopius, Anecd., 11, 18. I pass over events in which religion was the chief question at issue, as the whole can be treated most instructively in a special chapter; see below, chap. xiv.

[101] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 18; cf. Malala, p. 462. The latter gives some details as to the mischief already done by the marauders, and states that the Antiocheans began to fly in terror to the sea coast. Gabbulae was about ninety miles east of Antioch.

[102] They were at this time almost exactly on the track of Xenophon when he accompanied Cyrus nearly a thousand years previously through a country then strange to the Greeks, but now become a part of their native land. His description is familiar to those of the old school: "In this place the earth was smooth all over, like the sea, and full of wormwood. Every other kind of shrub or reed was sweet-smelling and of the class of aromatics, but there was nothing in the way of a tree.... With the Euphrates on the right we arrived at Pylae. In these stages many of the beasts of burden perished of hunger; for there was no grass, nor any sort of tree, but the whole country was bare," etc.; Anabasis, i, 5. He adds that the only occupation the inhabitants had was digging up mill-stones, which they took to Babylon for sale.

[103] Hermogenes was also present at this time, but only through having fallen in with the army as he was on his way to Hierapolis, where Rufinus was constantly stationed as the most convenient post from which to open up diplomatic relations with Ctesiphon. Zachariah Myt. relates that Azarathes begged Belisarius to postpone the battle on account of the "Nazarenes and Jews" in the Persian army, who were also keeping the fast.

[104] Malala (p. 464), however, shows up Belisarius in a very unfavourable light. As soon as he saw that the day was lost, he seized his standard, jumped into a boat, and rowed away with all speed to Callinicus. But Sunicas, the leader of the cavalry he had abandoned, dismounted and sustained the attack of the enemy as described by Procopius. It is safest to believe the latter.

[105] Here again Zachariah and Malala (p. 466) differ from Procopius, and assert that Belisarius was superseded on account of his failure on the Euphrates. But subsequent events show that P. is more to be trusted, and that Justinian attached small blame to Belisarius.

[106] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 18.

[107] "Nejâshi" is the nearest transliteration of the Semitic title; see Nöldeke, _op. cit._, p. 195; Zotenberg, _op. cit._, p. 182, etc.

[108] Ela-Atsbeha is the correct name as found on coins; see Schlumberger, Rev. Numismat., 1886.

[109] Most information about these nations will be found in Godefroy ad Cod. Theod., XII, xii, 2, and Act. Sanct. (Bol.) lviii, 660-762 (Mart. Arethas). For a clue to recent additions see Diehl, _op. cit._, p. 392 _et seq._, and below, chap. xiv.

[110] Jn. Malala (p. 457) indicates that the regular route to Axume was still the same as that described above from earlier writers when I was sketching the commercial activities of the age; see p. 190. He places the embassy before the action on the Euphrates, but his chronological sequence is often wrong. From Procopius (_loc. cit._, 19, _et seq._) it seems to have been before or at least about the same time. The Berenice mentioned by Procopius (De Aedif., vi, 2) is not that on the Red Sea (see p. 190), but on the Great Syrtis.

[111] We owe this description of Soudanese pageantry to Jn. Malala (xviii, p. 457), who professes to be copying a report published by the ambassador himself.

[112] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 20; Malala, _loc. cit._

[113] The abstract of Nonnosus's own account has been preserved by Photius.

[114] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 20.

[115] _Ibid._, 19. Further details in Tabari, for which see chap. xiv below.

[116] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 21. It should be noted that P. is not now relating his own experiences, as he returned to Constantinople with Belisarius.

[117] _Ibid._ He was at Attachae, not far from Amida; cf. Zachariah Myt., _loc. cit._, 6.

[118] The exploits of Bessas are dwelt on by Zachariah Myt., _loc. cit._, 5 _et seq._ Most details of the siege are given by Malala (p. 468 _et seq._), which, however, I omit here as we shall have more interesting opportunities later on of studying the mode of procedure at sieges in this age.

[119] Procopius, _loc. cit._

[120] He became rich through these successes, says Zachariah Myt. It seems that in such cases the spoils became the property of the army, and no attempt was made to restore what was recaptured to the former owners.

[121] Orientalists consider that Malala (p. 471) is best informed here. Procopius relates that Cavades left a will, on the strength of which Chosroes was elected Shah by an assembly of the nobles in opposition to the claim of the eldest son, Caoses; _loc. cit._, 21. Sometimes Theophanes seems to copy Malala, but in this case he is so ignorant as to make Chosroes succeed in 525!

[122] Some details of this dissension are given by Procopius; _loc. cit._, 23. A party conspired to set up a younger Cavades, grandson of the elder through his second son Zames, who was debarred by reason of his being blind of one eye. Ultimately this Kavádh fled to CP. (_c._ 546), and it is supposed that he is the authority whence Procopius derived his knowledge of Persian history. The historian, however, gives vent to his suspicion that this fugitive was an impostor, the real pretender having most probably perished.

[123] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 22; Jn. Malala, p. 471. According to the first the Roman legates sued for peace with cringing flattery, whereas Malala states that Justinian's reply to an announcement from Chosroes that he had ascended the throne was, "We do not acknowledge you as king of Persia, nor do we permit our legates to visit you." Moreover he taunted Chosroes with having invited the Huns, and only after the latter had repudiated all responsibility for their acts were diplomatic relations established.