Vologaeses V, King of Parthia (145 - 208) MP

public profile

Vologaeses V, King of Parthia's Geni Profile

Share your family tree and photos with the people you know and love

  • Build your family tree online
  • Share photos and videos
  • Smart Matching™ technology
  • Free!

Share

Birthplace: Armenia, (Parthia), Turkey
Death: Died in Armenia, (Parthia), Turkey
Occupation: King of Parthia
Managed by: L Foxvog
Last Updated:

About Vologaeses V, King of Parthia

http://a.decarne.free.fr/gencar/dat588.htm#15

appears to continue back from here to year dot! Sharon Doubell -------------------- The family of Valagash V ou Vologèse IV (tg) .. and ..

[128922] .., Valagash V ou Vologèse IV (tg) (Valagash IV & .. [128921]), roi des Parthes, born about 145, died 208

  • married about 170

.., .. (..)

     1) Chrosov ou Chosroes Ier (tg), roi d'Arménie, born about 171, died 217, married about 190 ..

Bibliographie : Traité de généalogie (René Jetté)

http://www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/128/128922.php -------------------- regerade Armenien 180-191 och Parthia 190-207

Det historiska Armenien

Det ursprungliga Armenien upptog, ett flertal sekel f Kr, ett stort område öster om Mindre

Asien och söder om Kaukasus. Svarta havet och Kaspiska havet ligger i nordväst, respektive

nordost. Söderut låg parternas och persernas mäktiga riken. Den kanske mest kända symbolen

för Armenien är berget Ararat, där Noaks ark ska ha strandat efter sin långa resa. (Idag ligger

visserligen berget strax innanför den turkiska gränsen, men det är fullt synligt från många

delar av landet.)

Namnet Ararat är nära besläktat med Urartu, assyriernas namn på det kungarike som en

gång låg på samma plats som det historiska Armenien. Detta rike nådde sin höjdpunkt

omkring 800-talet till 500-talet f Kr och var då en stark konkurrent till det mäktiga Assyrien,

om makten i området. En annan historiskt och symboliskt viktig plats är Araxesdalen, som är

mycket bördig och som av vissa påstås vara det ursprungliga Edens lustgård.

När Urartu-riket gick under ca 590 f Kr kom olika stammar invandrande till området.

Tillsammans kallade de sig för Hayastan, vilket fortfarande är det armeniska språkets

benämning på Armenien.

Tre hjältar

Den armeniska historien skulle kunna skrivas mycket lång och händelserik, men de första

femhundra åren e Kr skulle kunna sammanfattas runt tre historiska hjältar, vilka alla har sin

plats i den armeniska identiteten.

189 f Kr utgjorde delar av Armenien en provins inom det seleukidiska riket, men detta år

inleddes även något som skulle bli den armeniska storhetstiden. Arthases (Artaxias) utropade

nämligen en del av området till ett självständigt kungadöme, vilket under den närmaste

följande tiden fick flera efterföljare. Med tiden kom de att närma sig varandra, för att sedan,

under kung Tigran den store (95 – 56 f Kr) bli enade till en nation. Det var också under

honom som det historiska Armenien nådde sin geografiskt sett största utbredning, omfattande

bland annat delar av Mesopotamien, Syrien, Cilicien och ända ner mot Palestina. Visserligen

hann riket även minska en del under kung Tigrans styre, då romarna erövrade delar av landet,

men detta talas det inte mycket om, utan det är enandet av landet som är det viktiga.

Under åren 287 – 294 och 297 – 330 e Kr styrdes Armenien av kung Tirdat III. Det var

under dennes tid som St Grigor (Gregorius), upplysaren, enligt traditionen kom till landet och

ska ha omvänt kungen (och därmed hela folket) till kristendomen. Detta ska ha skett år 301

och med stöd av detta hävdar armenierna att de utgör den äldsta kristna staten i världen och

armenierna det äldsta kristna folket.

Från år 430 och under ett par århundraden framöver var Armenien delat mellan Bysans i

väst och perserna i öst. De senare inledde förföljelser mot folket för att få dem att övergå till

den persiska zoroastrismen. En nationell, armenisk armé samlades dock under general Vardan

Mamikonians ledning för att kämpa mot perserna. År 451 stod ett avgörande slag vid Avrayr,

där visserligen armenierna förlorade mot den överlägsna persiska krigsmaskinen och där

general Vardan dog, men armenierna garanterades rätten att förbli kristna under persisk

överhöghet. Vardan är en förebild för folkets kamp mot olika förtryckare och kampen för

rätten att vara kristna.

Ett lidande folk

Förutom de dryga sex seklerna kring Kristi födelse har armenierna nästan alltid varit styrda av

(och ofta uppdelade mellan) andra riken. Den längsta perioden av främmande styre och även

den som kanske har satt mest spår i dagens armeniska identitet var den turkiska/ottomanska

tiden. Redan under 1000-talets andra hälft trängde turkarna in i området och tog makten för

ett par hundra år. Efter ett antal andra härskare från olika håll kom sedan Armenien åter under

turkiskt styre på 1500-talet, något som skulle sätta ett outplånligt spår i den armeniska

historien.

Genom historien har återkommande upprorsförsök mot olika ockupationsmakter så gott

som alltid brutalt slagits ned. Detta har givit den armeniska identiteten en ständig närvaro av

det historiska lidande som folket gått igenom under århundradenas lopp. Det finns dock ett

särskilt tillfälle som varit upphov till värre lidande än någonsin tidigare. Under 1880-talet

hade en nationell armenisk rörelse uppstått, något som inte sågs med blida ögon av de

styrande turkarna. Svåra förföljelser kom till följd av detta, vilka kulminerade i deportation

och systematisk utrotning av omkring 1,5 miljoner människor under och strax efter första

världskriget. Denna ofattbara tragedi lever kvar i näst intill varje armenier idag, och går ofta

under namnet ”massakern”.

Att detta ”historiens första folkmord” idag kan vara så okänt är skrämmande. Relativt sett

var massmorden på armenier större än nazisternas utrotningsförsök av judar. De 1,5 miljoner

som avrättades utgjorde en större del av folket än de ca 6 miljoner judar som fick sätta livet

till under andra världskriget.

Kyrkan ger identitet

Då armenierna saknat kungar och andra oberoende styren under större delen av historien har

ledarskapet för nationen, och därmed också centralpunkten för identifikationen, tagits över av

den armeniska apostoliska kyrkan. De mest begåvade intellektuella har ofta blivit präster och

under lång tid var den armeniska utbildningen underställd kyrkan. Tillsammans med den

gemensamma historien av lidande och det egna språket utgör den kristna tron grundpelarna i

den armeniska identiteten.

Den armeniska kyrkan präglas av två starka särdrag. Det första är kyrkans strukturella

demokratiska uppbyggnad. Liksom flera andra kyrkor är den armeniska kyrkan idag uppdelad

i (fyra) patriarkat, i vilka patriarkerna (katolikoserna) har en stark ställning som talesmän för

den armeniska befolkningen i respektive område. Det råder dock inga motsättningar

patriarkerna emellan, utan snarare tvärtom. I ett tal uttryckte en av dem sig på följande sätt:

”Vi är en kyrka. Vi har varit en kyrka genom århundraden. Vi ska fortsätta att vara en kyrka i

kommande århundrade.” Den, med historiska mått mätt, demokratiska och allomfattande

kyrkan har säkerligen många gånger motverkat splittring hos folket. Det andra karaktärsdraget

är den på vissa punkter näst intill unika kristna läran. Framför allt är det den monofysitiska

ståndpunkten som utmärker sig, vilken utvecklas senare.

Det är också i ljuset av den armeniska kyrkans starka position som man bör se traditionen

att söka rötterna tillbaka till Noas son Jafet och därmed (med hjälp av religionen) rättfärdiga

sin närvaro i det historiska Armenien. Kanske har kyrkans roll ändå varit än starkare utanför

det armeniska territoriet. De många armenier som genom historiens lopp levt utanför

hemlandet har ändå bibehållit en utpräglad känsla av etnisk egenart, generation efter

generation. Man har exempelvis betecknat kyrkan som ”det frånvarande fosterlandets synbara

själ”.

Kyrkans lära och tradition

Trots att vissa traditioner har levt kvar sedan tiden innan kristendomens ankomst och mer

eller mindre har blivit accepterade av kyrkan är den armeniska läran grundad på Bibeln och de

tre första allmänna (ekumeniska) kyrkomötena.

Två särarter i den armenisk-kristna traditionen är dels det s k djuroffret, matal, och dels det

symboliska livsträdet. Djuroffret härstammar från förkristen tid, men tillämpas fortfarande på

vissa platser. Dock ses det idag snarare som en sedvänja än en religiös handling och det finns

en tendens från kyrkans håll att förtiga matal-ceremonin, men man kan inte bortse ifrån att

kyrkan på ett tidigt stadium godkände offrandet och även reglerade det i sina religiösa lagar.

Livsträdet å sin sida, är ett bra exempel på den religiösa och kulturella kontinuitet som präglar

det armeniska området. Från den tidiga Urartu-kulturens många bilder av livsträdet, via

armenisk ”trädkult”, till dyrkan av Kristi kors som livsträdet har den förkristna symbolen

”slussats in” i den kristna läran.

Vid det första kyrkomötet i Nicaea år 325 representerades armenierna av Grigor,

upplysaren, och de centrala punkterna var beslutet att Fadern, Sonen och den Helige Anden är

tre personer som tillsammans bildar en gudom. Detta är en av grundpelarna i den armeniska

läran, liksom den trosbekännelse som formulerades vid mötet och som sjungs i varje armenisk

mässa.

Kyrkomötet i Efesus år 431, det tredje i ordningen, konstaterade att Kristus inte bara var en

människa som utgjorde Guds tempel, utan att Kristus är Guds son och att därmed Maria inte

bara är Kristi moder utan också Guds moder. Detta är en ståndpunkt som även den armeniska

kyrkan fasthåller, liksom majoriteten av mötets deltagare.

Det fjärde kyrkomötet, som hölls år 451 i Kalcedon, saknade armenisk närvaro, då de låg i

strid med perserna vid Avarayr. När de senare fick del av mötets beslut förkastade de detta.

Man kunde dels inte godta den romerske påven Leos ståndpunkt att påven av Rom skulle vara

kyrkans överhuvud. Mötet proklamerade också tron på Kristi dubbla natur, den mänskliga och

den gudomliga. Den armeniska kyrkan hävdar istället ”tron på en enda förenad natur hos

Guds enfödde son”. Detta kom att kallas den monofysitiska läran, och lever idag kvar även i

exempelvis den koptiska och den etiopiska kyrkan.

Armeniska kyrkans sakrament

I den armeniska kyrkan räknar man till sju sakrament av vilka tre (dopet, konfirmationen och

ordinationen) endast kan tas emot en gång. De sju sakramenten är:

Dopet – det grundläggande sakramentet. Genom dopet förenas man med Kristi kropp och

inlemmas i Kristi kyrka. Man får syndernas förlåtelse och blir värdig att ta emot de övriga

sakramenten.

Myron-smörjelsen/konfirmationen – följer omedelbart efter dopet. Sätter den döpta

människan i stånd att möta världens prövningar och frestelser. Nu mottager hon den helig

Anden, vilket gör henne redo att bekänna den kristna tron.

Nattvarden – en mötesplats för de kristna, ett enhetens sakrament. Den plats där Kristus föder

lemmarna i sin kropp och förenar dem med sig själv. De yttre, synliga tecknen är (det

osyrade) brödet och vinet, som mottas av de kristna efter att ha helgats av prästen. Brödet och

vinet förvandlas visserligen inte fysiskt till kött och blod, och Kristus är inte fysiskt

närvarande, men han är det andligt.

Nattvarden är en andlig reningsprocess och endast den som tror och som ångrar sina synder

kan ta del av nattvarden, annars kan man inte få del av välsignelsen. Följden blir andlig skada

och fördömelse, men för den som bekänner sina synder blir nattvarden en överlåtelsehandling.

Den som vill deltaga i den heliga måltiden måste alltså först bikta sig, ta emot absolution

(förlåtelse) och visa att man vill göra bättring. Man måste också fasta från midnatt innan man

går till nattvarden, den ska nämligen vara det första man tar i munnen den dagen.

Bikten och botgöringen – till för dem som behöver förlåtelse för de synder de begått efter

dopet. Sakramentet består av tre delar; botfärdigheten, bikten inför prästen, som uttalar

absolutionen, samt avlösningen. Absolutionen kan endast uttalas av en präst eller någon annan

högre kyrklig ämbetsman, vilka fått myndigheten att göra detta genom den apostoliska

successionen. Prästen handlar här som Guds tjänare, inte som egen person. Det är endast de

som verkligen ångrar sig som kan få absolution.

Ordinationen – avskiljer en medlem av Kristi kropp till en särskild tjänst inom kyrkan. Den

armeniska kyrkan har åtta olika ordinationer, fyra lägre och fyra högre. De lägre är

dörrvaktare, föreläsare, edsvärare och lampbärare. De högre är diakon, präst, biskop, samt

katolikos.

Äktenskapet – en varaktig förening mellan man och kvinna, liksom föreningen mellan Kristus

och kyrkan är varaktig. Äktenskapet är en förbindelse instiftad av Gud och räknas därför till

sakramenten. Idealet är egentligen kyskhet, men ”om de inte kan behärska sig bör de gifta sig;

det är bättre att gifta sig än att brinna av åtrå” (1 Kor 7:9). Målet för äktenskapet är att skaffa

barn, som ska bli nya medlemmar i kyrkan. Till skillnad från de andra sakramenten finns inga

yttre ceremonier för äktenskapet, då det innehåller sådant som inte helt ryms inom en religiös

ram. Äktenskapets yttre sida består snarare i att man börjar leva på ett nytt sätt, än att man

genomgår en högtidlig ceremoni. I teorin kan äktenskapet endast upplösas genom döden och

ett nytt äktenskap med en skild person medan den förre maken ännu är i livet är ett brott mot

Guds lag.

Sjuksmörjelsen – det sjunde sakramentet, vilket handlar om en förberedelse inför döden.

Den gudomliga liturgin

Armenisk liturgi är fylld av vördnad för det heliga. Alla böner och ceremonier bär något av en

”klassisk skönhet” i sina utformningar. Liturgin fyller församlingen med glädje och triumf

och allt är i botten ett uttryck för det hemlighetsfulla skeende då Gud blev till människa.

Den armeniska liturgin kan delas in i tre delar; den första delen är en

förberedelsegudstjänst, där prästen klär sig i mässkruden och förbereder nattvarden. Del två

är katekumenernas gudstjänst (katekumener var människor som ännu inte döpts in i den

fornkristna församlingen och därför inte fick ta nattvarden). Den tredje delen är de troendes

gudstjänst, där nattvarden utdelas.

Liksom så mycket annat när det gäller armenierna har liturgin rötter långt tillbaka i tiden, i

den urkristna gudstjänsten. Redan på 100-talet började man fira gudstjänst efter bestämda

former och på 300-talet hade liturgier utformats i grekiska, koptiska syrianska och armeniska

kyrkor.

Material

Bonniers Lexikon, del 1, Bonniers, Ljubljana, 1994

Bonniers Lexikon, del 13, Bonniers, Ljubljana, 1996

Gunner, Göran, m fl – Längtan till Ararat, Förlagshuset Gothia, Bollebyggd, 1985

Karlsson, Karl-Göran, - Armenien: Från berget Ararat…, MH Publishing, Göteborg, 1990

Lang, David Marshall – Armenier: Ett folk i exil, Tryckeriförlaget, Täby, 1989

Parthia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Parthia

Parthian Empire at its greatest extent, c. 60 BCE.

Languages Aramaic

Religions Zoroastrianism

Capitals Ctesiphon, Hecatompylus

Area Middle East

Existed 238 BCE–228 CE

Parthia was a civilization situated in the northeast of modern Iran, but at its height covering all of Iran proper, as well as regions of the modern countries of Armenia, Iraq, Georgia, eastern Turkey, eastern Syria, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, Kuwait, the Persian Gulf coast of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, and UAE.

Parthia was led by the Arsacid dynasty, who reunited and ruled over the Iranian plateau, taking over the eastern provinces of the Greek Seleucid Empire, beginning in the late 3rd century BC, and intermittently controlled Mesopotamia between ca 150 BC and 224 AD. It was the third native dynasty of ancient Iran (after the Median and the Achaemenid dynasties). Parthia (mostly due to their invention of heavy cavalry) was the arch-enemy of the Roman Empire in the east; and it limited Rome's expansion beyond Cappadocia (central Anatolia).

After the Scythian-Parni nomads (Assyrians called them Ashkuz) had settled in Parthia and had built a small independent kingdom, they rose to power under king Mithridates the Great (171–138 BC). Later, at the height of their power, Parthian influence reached as far as Ubar in Arabia, the nexus of the frankincense trade route, where Parthian-inspired ceramics have been found. The power of the early Parthian empire seems to have been overestimated by some ancient historians, who could not clearly separate the powerful later empire from its more humble obscure origins. The end of this long-lived empire came in 224 AD, when the empire was loosely organized and the last king was defeated by one of the empire's vassals, the Persians of the Sassanid dynasty.

Little is known of the Parthians; not much of their own literature has survived. Consequently Parthian history is largely derived from foreign histories, controlled by the evidence of coins and inscriptions; even their own name for themselves is debatable due to a lack of domestic records. Several Greek authors, of whom we have fragments, including Apollodorus of Artemita and Isidore of Charax, wrote under Parthian rule. Their power was based on a combination of the guerilla warfare of a mounted nomadic tribe, with organisational skills sufficient to build and administer a vast empire - even though it never matched in power the Persian empires that preceded and followed it. Vassal kingdoms seem to have made up a large part of their territory (see Tigranes II of Armenia), and Hellenistic cities enjoyed a certain autonomy; their craftsmen received employment by some Parthians.

Strabo considered Parthians to be Carduchi, i.e., the inhabitants of Curdistan.[2]


CONTENTS

1 Parthia as a satrapy

2 The Parthian Empire

3 Government

4 Parthian language

5 Contact with China

6 Conflicts with Rome

7 Expansion to India

8 Decline and fall

9 Parthian rulers

10 References

11 Notes



Parthia as a satrapy

Parthia originally designated a territory southeast of the Caspian sea. It was a satrapy of the Achaemenid Empire, which was conquered by Alexander the Great circa 330 BCE. Following Alexander's death, the government of Parthia was given to Nicanor, at the Partition of Babylon in 323 BCE. At the Partition of Triparadisus in 320 BCE, Parthia was given to Philip. Philip was then succeeded by Peithon. From 311 BCE Parthia then became a part of the Seleucid empire, being ruled by various satraps under a Seleucid king.


Andragoras (?-238 BCE) was the last Seleucid satrap of the province of "Partahia", under the Seleucid rulers Antiochus I Soter and Antiochus II Theos (Justin, xli. 4). Andragoras tried to wrestle independence from the Seleucid Empire, at a time when the Seleucid were embroiled in conflict with Ptolemaic Egypt. In defiance, he issued coins in which he wears the royal diadem as well as his name (Will: I, 1966). Andragoras was a neighbour, a contemporary, and probably an ally of Diodotus I in Bactria, who also wrestled independence around the same time, giving rise to the Greco-Bactrian kingdom.

The Parthian Empire

The tribe of the Parni, a nomadic people of Iranian origin, who originally spoke an Eastern Iranian language and later known as the Parthians, entered the Iranian plateau from Central Asia. They were consummate horsemen, known for the 'Parthian shot': turning backwards at full gallop to loose an arrow directly to the rear. Initially, ca. 238 BCE, their king named Arsaces (Ashk) toppled Andragoras and established his dynasty's independence from Seleucid rule in remote areas of northern Iran in what is today known as Turkmenistan.

"He (Arsaces) was used to a life of pillage and theft, when he heard about the defeat of Seleucus against the Gauls. Relieved from his fear of the king, he attacked the Parthians with a band of thieves, vanquished their prefect Andragoras, and, after having killed him took the power over the nation" Justin, xli. 4.

The descendants of Arsaces ruled until Antiochus III the Great invaded Parthia in 209 BC, occupied the capital Hecatompylus and pushed forward into Hyrcania. The Parthian king Arsaces II apparently successfully sued for peace, and Parthia recognized Seleucid authority. Antiochus III had so well secured Parthia that he moved further east into Bactria, where he fought the Greco-Bactrian king Euthydemus I for three years, and then went into India.

It was not until the 2nd century BC that the Parthians were able to profit from the continuing erosion of the Seleucid Empire, gradually capturing all its territories east of Syria. Once the Parthians had gained Herat, the movement of trade along the Silk Road to China was effectively choked off and the post-Alexandrian Hellenistic Greco-Bactrian Kingdom was doomed.

The Seleucid monarchs attempted to "hold the line" against the Parthian expansion; Antiochus IV Epiphanes spent his last years on a campaign against the newly emerging Iranian states. After his death in 164 BC, the Parthians took advantage of the ensuing dynastic squabbles to make even greater gains.


.In 139 BC, the Parthian king Mithridates I captured the Seleucid monarch Demetrius II Nicator, holding him captive for ten years while his troops overwhelmed Mesopotamia and Media.

By 129 BC the Parthians were in control of all the lands right to the Tigris, and established their winter encampment on its banks at Ctesiphon, downstream from modern Baghdad. Ctesiphon was then a small suburb directly across the river from Seleucia on the Tigris, the most Hellenistic city of western Asia. Because of their need of the wealth and trade provided by Seleucia, the Parthian armies limited their incursions to harassment, allowing the city to preserve its independence. In the heat of the Mesopotamian summer, the Parthian army would withdraw to the ancient Persian capitals of Susa and Ecbatana (modern Hamadan).

From around 130 BCE, the Parthians suffered numerous incursions by Scythian nomads (also called the Tocharians from Bactria, possibly the Yuezhi), in which kings Phraates II and Artabanus I were successively killed. Scythians again invaded Parthia around 90 BCE, putting king Sanatruces on the Parthian throne.

Government


After the conquest of Media, Assyria, Babylonia and Elam, the Parthians had to organize their empire. The former elites of these countries were Greek, and the new rulers had to adapt to their customs if they wanted their rule to last. As a result, the cities retained their ancient rights and civil administrations remained more or less undisturbed. An interesting detail is coinage: legends were written in the Greek alphabet, a practice that continued until the 2nd century AD, when local knowledge of the language was in decline and few people knew how to read or write the Greek alphabet.

Another source of inspiration was the Achaemenid dynasty that had once ruled the Persian Empire. Courtiers spoke Persian and used the Pahlavi script; the royal court traveled from capital to capital, and the Arsacid kings styled themselves "king of kings". It was an apt title, as in addition to his own kingdom the Parthian monarch was the overlord of some eighteen vassal kings, such as the rulers of the city state Hatra, the kingdom of Characene and the ancient kingdom of Armenia.


The empire was, overall, not very centralized. There were several languages, many peoples, and a number of different economic systems. The loose ties between the separate parts of the empire were a key to its survival. In the 2nd century AD, the most important capital, Ctesiphon, was captured no less than three times by the Romans (in 116, 165 and 198 AD), but the empire survived because there were other centers of power. On the other hand, the fact that the empire was a mere conglomeratation of kingdoms, provinces and city-states did at times seriously weaken the Parthian state. This was a major factor in the halt of the Parthian expansion after the conquests of Mesopotamia and Persia.

Local potentates played important roles, and the king had to respect their privileges. Several noble families had votes in the Royal council; the Suren-Pahlav Clan had the right to crown the Parthian king, and every aristocrat was allowed and expected to retain an army of his own. When the throne was occupied by a weak ruler, divisions among the nobility became dangerous.

The constituent parts of the empire were surprisingly independent. For example, they were allowed to strike their own coins, a privilege which in antiquity was very rare. As long as the local elite paid tribute to the Parthian king, there was little interference. The system worked well: towns like Ctesiphon, Seleucia, Ecbatana, Rhagae, Hecatompylos, Nisâ, and Susa flourished.

Tribute was one source of royal income; another was tolls. Parthia controlled the Silk Road, the trade route between the Mediterranean Sea and China.

Parthian language

Parthian is a now-extinct ancient Northwestern Iranian language that originated in Parthia (a region in north-east of modern Iran and the Greater Khorasan, including southern part of what is today known as Turkmenistan) and was the official language of the Parthian Empire under the Arsacid Dynasty (248 BC - 224 AD).

Contact with China

The Chinese explorer Zhang Qian, who visited the neighbouring countries of Bactria and Sogdiana in 126 BC, made the first known Chinese report on Parthia. In his accounts Parthia is named "?nx?" (Chinese: ??), a transliteration of "Arsacid", the name of the Parthian dynasty. Zhang Qian clearly identifies Parthia as an advanced urban civilization, which he equates to those of Dayuan (in Ferghana) and Daxia (in Bactria).

"Anxi is situated several thousand li west of the region of the Great Yuezhi (in Transoxonia). The people are settled on the land, cultivating the fields and growing rice and wheat. They also make wine out of grapes. They have walled cities like the people of Dayuan (Ferghana), the region contains several hundred cities of various sizes. The coins of the country are made of silver and bear the face of the king. When the king dies, the currency is immediately changed and new coins issued with the face of his successor. The people keep records by writing on horizontal strips of leather. To the west lies Tiaozhi (Mesopotamia) and to the north Yancai and Lixuan (Hyrcania)." (Shiji, 123, Zhang Qian quote, trans. Burton Watson).

Following Zhang Qian's embassy and report, commercial relations between China, Central Asia, and Parthia flourished, as many Chinese missions were sent throughout the 1st century BC: "The largest of these embassies to foreign states numbered several hundred persons, while even the smaller parties included over 100 members... In the course of one year anywhere from five to six to over ten parties would be sent out." (Shiji, trans. Burton Watson).

The Parthians were apparently very intent on maintaining good relations with China and also sent their own embassies, starting around 110 BC: "When the Han envoy first visited the kingdom of Anxi (Parthia), the king of Anxi dispatched a party of 20,000 horsemen to meet them on the eastern border of the kingdom... When the Han envoys set out again to return to China, the king of Anxi dispatched envoys of his own to accompany them... The emperor was delighted at this." (Shiji, 123, trans. Burton Watson).

In 97 the Chinese general Ban Chao went as far west as the Caspian Sea with 70,000 men and established direct military contacts with the Parthian Empire.

Parthians also played a role in the Silk Road transmission of Buddhism from Central Asia to China. An Shih Kao, a Parthian nobleman and Buddhist missionary, went to the Chinese capital Luoyang in 148 where he established temples and became the first man to translate Buddhist scriptures into Chinese.

Conflicts with Rome

Main article: Roman relations with the Parthians and Sassanians



.In 53 BC, the Roman general Crassus invaded Parthia, but was defeated at the Battle of Carrhae by a Parthian commander called Surena in the Greek and Latin sources, most likely a member of the Suren-Pahlav Clan. This was the beginning of a series of wars that were to last for almost three centuries.

The Parthian armies included two types of cavalry: the heavily-armed and armoured cataphracts and lightly armed but highly-mobile mounted archers. For the Romans, who relied on heavy infantry, the Parthians were too hard to defeat, as both types of cavalry were much faster and more mobile than foot soldiers. On the other hand, the Parthians found it difficult to occupy conquered areas as they were unskilled in siege warfare. Because of these weaknesses, neither the Romans nor the Parthians were able to completely defeat each other.

In the years following the battle of Carrhae the Romans were divided in civil war between the adherents of Pompey and those of Julius Caesar and hence unable to campaign against Parthia. Although Caesar was eventually victorious against Pompey and was planning a campaign against Parthia, his subsequent murder led to another civil war. The Roman general Quintus Labienus, who had supported Caesar's murderers and feared reprisals from his heirs, Mark Antony and Octavian (later Augustus), sided with the Parthians and eventually became the best general of king Pacorus I. In 41 BC Parthia, led by Labienus, invaded Syria, Cilicia, and Caria and attacked Phrygia in Asia Minor. A second army intervened in Judaea and captured its king Hyrcanus II. The spoils were immense, and put to good use: King Phraates IV invested them in building up Ctesiphon.

In 39 BC, Antony retaliated, sending out the old warhorse general Publius Ventidius Bassus and several of Caesar's crack, veteran legions to secure the conquered territories. The Parthian King Pacorus was killed along with Labienus, and the Euphrates again became the border between the two nations. Hoping to further avenge the death of Crassus, Antony invaded Mesopotamia in 36 BC with the Legion VI Ferrata and other units. Having cavalry in support, Antony reached Armenia but ceased his advance as civil war again broke out in Rome.

Antony's campaign was followed by a break in the fighting between the two empires as Rome was again embroiled in civil war. When Octavian defeated Mark Antony, he ignored the Parthians, being more interested in the west. His son-in-law and future successor Tiberius negotiated a peace treaty with Phraates (20 BC).


At the same time, around the year 1, the Parthians became interested in the valley of the Indus, where they began conquering the petty kingdoms of Gandhara. One of the Parthian leaders was Gondophares, king of Taxila; according to an old and widespread Christian tradition, he was baptized by the apostle Thomas. While it may sound far-fetched, the story is not altogether impossible: adherents of several religions lived together in Gandara and the Punjab, and there may have been an audience for a representative of a new Jewish sect.

War broke out again between Rome and Parthia in the 60s. Armenia had become a Roman vassal kingdom, but the Parthian king Vologases I appointed a new Armenian ruler. This was too much for the Romans, and their commander Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo invaded Armenia. The result was that the Armenian king received his crown again in Rome from the emperor Nero. A compromise was worked out between the two empires: in the future, the king of Armenia was to be a Parthian prince, but his appointment required approval from the Romans.

Expansion to India

Main article: Indo-Parthian Kingdom


Also during the 1st century BC, the Parthians started to make inroads into eastern territories that had been occupied by the Indo-Scythians and the Yuezhi. The Parthians gained control of parts of Bactria and extensive South Asian territories in modern day Pakistan, after defeating local rulers such as the Kushan Empire ruler Kujula Kadphises, in the Gandhara region.

The ruins of the ancient port city of Siraf are in the process of excavation, and its historical importance to ancient trade is only now being realized. Discovered there in archaeological excavations are ivory objects from east Africa, pieces of stone from India, and lapis from Afghanistan. Sirif dates back to the Parthian era.[3]

Around 20 AD, Gondophares, one of the Parthian conquerors, declared his independence from the Parthian empire and established the Indo-Parthian Kingdom in the conquered territories.

Decline and fall

The Armenian compromise served its purpose, but nothing in it covered the deposition of an Armenian king. After 110 AD, the Parthian king Vologases III dethroned the Armenian ruler, and the Roman emperor Trajan decided to invade Parthia in retaliation. War broke out in 114 AD and the Parthians were severely beaten. The Romans conquered Armenia, and in the following year, Trajan marched to the south, where the Parthians were forced to evacuate their strongholds. In 116 AD, Trajan captured Ctesiphon, and established new provinces in Assyria and Babylonia. Later that year he took the Parthian capital, Susa, deposed the Parthian King Osroes I and put Parthamaspates as a puppet ruler on the throne.

Rebellions soon broke out due to the continuing loyalty of the population to Parthia. At the same time, the diasporic Jews revolted and Trajan was forced to send an army to suppress them. Trajan overcame these troubles, but his successor Hadrian gave up the territories (117 AD).

Parthian weaknesses also contributed to the disaster. In the first century AD, the Parthian nobility had become more powerful due to concessions by the Parthian king granting them greater powers over the land and the peasantry. Their power now rivaled the king's, while at the same time internal divisions in the Arsacid family had rendered them vulnerable.


But the end was not near, yet. In 161 AD king Vologases IV declared war against the Romans and reconquered Armenia. The Roman counter-offensive was slow, but in 165 AD, Ctesiphon fell, and the Parthians were only saved by the outburst of a catastrophic epidemic (probably the measles) which temporarily crippled the two empires. The Roman emperors Lucius Verus and Marcus Aurelius added northern Mesopotamia to their realm (partly as a vassal-kingdom), but as it was never secure enough for them to demilitarize the region between the Euphrates and Tigris. It remained an expensive burden.

The deciding blow came thirty years later. King Vologases V had tried to reconquer Mesopotamia during another Roman civil war (193 AD), but was repulsed when general Septimius Severus counter-attacked. Again, Ctesiphon was captured (198 AD), and large spoils were brought to Rome. According to a modern estimate, the gold and silver were sufficient to postpone a European economic crisis for three or four decades, and the consequences of the looting for Parthia were dire.

Parthia, now impoverished and without any hope to recover the lost territories, was demoralized. The kings were forced to concede greater powers to the nobility, and the vassal kings began to waver in their allegiance. In 224 AD, the Persian vassal king Ardašir revolted. Two years later, he took Ctesiphon, and this time it meant the end of Parthia, replaced by a third Persian Empire, ruled by the Sassanid dynasty.

Parthian rulers

Arsaces I c. 247–211 BC (In some histories, Arsaces's brother Tiridates I is said to have ruled c. 246–211 BC.)

Arsaces II c. 211–191 BC (frequently called Artabanus by early scholars)

Phriapatius c. 191–176 BC

Phraates I c. 176–171 BC

Mithridates I c. 171–138 BC

Phraates II c. 138–127 BC

Artabanus I c. 127–124 BC

Mithridates II c. 123–88 BC

Gotarzes I c. 95–90 BC

Orodes I c. 90–80 BC

Unknown king, c. 80–77 BC

Sanatruces c. 77–70 BC

Phraates III c. 70–57 BC

Mithridates III c. 57–54 BC

Orodes II c. 57–38 BC

Pacorus I c. 39–38 BC (co-ruler with his father Orodes II)

Phraates IV c. 38–2 BC

Tiridates II c. 30–26 BC

Phraates V (Phraataces) c. 2 BC–AD 4

Musa c. 2 BC–AD 4 (co-ruler with her son Phraates V)

Orodes III c. AD 6

Vonones I c. 8–12

Artabanus II c. 10–38

Tiridates III c. 35–36

Vardanes I c. 40–47

Gotarzes II c. 40–51

Sanabares c. 50–65

Vonones II 51

Vologases I c. 51–78

Vardanes II c. 55–58

Vologases II c. 77–80

Pacorus II c. 78–105

Artabanus III c. 80–90

Vologases III c. 105–147

Osroes I c. 109–129

Parthamaspates c. 116

Mithridates IV c. 129–140

Unknown king c. 140

Vologases IV c. 147–191

Osroes II c. 190 (rival claimant)

Vologases V c. 191–208

Vologases VI c. 208–228

Artabanus IV c. 216–224

[edit] References

Hill, John E. 2004. The Western Regions according to the Hou Hanshu. Draft annotated English translation.[1]

Hill, John E. 2004. The Peoples of the West from the Weilue ?? by Yu Huan ??: A Third Century Chinese Account Composed between 239 and 265 CE. Draft annotated English translation. [2]

[edit] Notes

^ Parthia derives from Latin Parthia, from Old Persian Parthava-, a dialectical variant of the stem Parsa-, from which Persia derives. Ashkanian appears to have come from the Sassanian chronicles, from which they entered in Ferdowsi's epic poem Shahnama.

^ History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Chapter 21.

^ Foreign Experts Talk of Siraf History. Cultural Heritage News Agency. Retrieved on 2006-12-11.

Overview of Parthian History

Prelude

There was a district named Partukka or Partakka which was known to the Assyrians as early as the seventh century B.C., and it may have formed a part of Media. Media was conquered by Cyrus (Kurush) the Great, founder of the Achaemenid empire.

The Achaemenids ruled Iran from 550 B.C. to 330 B.C. and their authority extended from the Danube river to the Indus river at its zenith. Under the Achaemenids, there was a satrapy named Parthava, probably gained by conquest between 546 and 539 B.C. during Cyrus the Great's campaign south and east of the Caspian Sea. (Debevoise, Political History, 4) At that time the satrapy included Hyrcania, which lay between the Elburz mountains and the Caspian Sea. Parthava revolted in 521 B.C., but was subdued and probably remained united with Hyrcania at the death of Darius. Later it was apparently separated from Hyrcania and then joined with Chorasmia. In the army of Xerxes, there was a contingent of Parthians under the command of a certain Artabazus son of Pharnaces, probably the satrap of Parthia. Among the Parthians killed in Xerxes' Greek campaign was a cavalry leader named Arsaces. (Aeschylus, Persae, 4) The last ruler of the Achaemenid line was Darius III Condomannus who was defeated by Alexander the Great. The Parthians fought on the side of the Achaemenids against Alexander at Arbela and Darius' satrap of Parthia, Phrataphernes, surrendered to Alexander in Hyrcania. (Arrian, Anabasis, iii)

After defeat by Alexander, Amminapses, a Parthian from Egypt, was made Alexander's satrap of Parthia, which had been joined with Hyrcania. In 318 B.C. Pithon, satrap of Media, seized Parthia and installed his brother Eudamus. But other satraps became alarmed and united under Peucestas of Persis to drive Pithon back to Media. (Justin xiii, 4. 23) After 316 B.C. the province was apparently joined to Bactria under the command of Stasanor. But after nearly a century of Macedonian Greek rule by Alexander and his Seleucid successors, the nearly continuous war with Egypt weakened the Seleucids to the point that Diodotus of Bactria revolted and declared himself king circa 253 B.C. (Justin xli, 4. 5)

Early History

The origins of the Parthian people are clouded. Strabo (xi, 515) says the first Arsaces was a Scythian man with the semi-nomadic Parni tribe, a part of the Dahi, nomads who lived along the Ochus (Tejend or lower Oxus) River, who invaded and conquered Parthia. Strabo also mentions those who claim Arsaces was a Bactrian who escaped from Diodotus after a failed revolt. Justin (xli, 1) agrees Arsaces was a Scythian. Frye's analysis is that we can believe the Parni origins, but it was more likely a migration than an invasion that brought them, and Arsaces, to Parthia. (History, p. 207) These people would not be known as Parthians until they moved southward into the Persian province of Parthava sometime before 250 B.C. Achaemenian and early Greek references to "Parthians" refer to earlier inhabitants of Parthava, not the Arsacid Parthians. (Debevoise, Political History, 2; W. M. Montgomery, Early Empires).

The Parthians took encouragement from Diodotus' success and in 247 B.C. rose against Andragoras, satrap of Parthia for Antichus II Theos (261-247 B.C.). This date is fixed by a double-dated tablet discovered by George Smith (Assyrian Discoveries, London, 1875). The revolt was led by the brothers Arsaces and Tiridates. Arsaces became king and his name the honorific used by all subsequent Parthian kings.

During the second century B.C., the Parthians were able to extend their rule to Bactria, Babylonia, Susiana, and Media, and under Mithradates II (c. 123 - 88 B.C.), Parthian conquests stretched from Armenia to India. After the victories of Mithradates II, the Parthians began to claim descent from both the Greeks and the Achaemenids. They spoke a language similar to that of the Achaemenids, used the Pahlavi script, and established an administrative system based on Achaemenid precedents.

Parthian "Dark Age" c. 95 - 57 B.C.

The most confused period of Parthian history is from the late years in the reign of Mithradates II (ended c. 88 B.C.) to the establishment of the sole rule of Orodes II c. 57 B.C. While Mithradates II was still in power, we have coins from Gotarzes I (c. 95 - 90 B.C.), Orodes I (c. 90 - 80 B.C.). And during the period immediately following the reign of Mithradates II, we see overlapping coinages of Orodes I (c. 90 - 80 B.C.), an Unknown King (I) c. 80 B.C., another Unknown King (II) (c. 80 - 70 B.C.), Sinatruces (c. 77 - 70 B.C.), and Darius of Media Atropatene (c. 70 B.C.). Phraates III appears to have consolidated control in the years around and following 70 B.C., and Orodes II took firm control c. 57 B.C. See the expanded discussion of this very confused period at the page on The Dark Age in Parthian History.

Roman Contact

In 53 B.C. Crassus and over 40,000 Roman troops were annihilated by the Parthian forces of Orodes II and the peoples from the Mediterranean to the Indus understood the strength of Parthia. But by 40 B.C. even Rome had to acknowledge a Parthia whose forces, under the joint command of Pacorus I and Q. Labienus, a Roman, had struck directly into the heart of the Roman East and captured the provinces of Asia, Pamphylia, Cilicia, and Syria; even as far south as Petra, Parthia's word was law. For two years this vast area, so vital to Roman interests, was under Parthian occupation. Possession of the Carian and perhaps the Ionian coast by foreigners struck close to home as many Romans were native to that part of the world or did business there. The occupiers were no sooner pushed out by Ventidius than another Roman army under Anthony was defeated and barely escaped annihilation at Parthian hands. [Debevoise, 208]

The tug of war with Rome on the western border of Parthia continued almost without cease while Parthia had to constantly see to other threats from the north and east. The western border between Rome's dominions and Parthia gradually stabilized on the banks of the Euphrates, but war was always a threat and though major campaigns by the Romans were seen in A.D. 116, 161, 195, 217 and 232, Parthia was never conquered.

Decline

The Parthian landed nobility gained power and influence due to their their military power and increasing rights over the land and its peasants. As these grew, they were sufficient to allow the nobles to resist then defy the king, refusing to pay levies and failing to answer the call to arms that had been Parthia's source of power. Concurrently, the royal Arsacids fell to internal disagreements over succession which often ended in murder and a continued slide in their power. The resulting disorganization and fragmentation of the empire made way for successful Roman incursions into Parthian territories where rich commercial centers and royal treasuries were plundered, and territories lost to invaders. Petty kings rose to fill the power void; this power redistribution culminated in a direct attempts to overthrow the monarchy.

End of Empire

In A.D. 224, Ardashir, Parthian governor in the Achaemenid home province of Persis (Fars), overthrew Artabanus IV and established the Sasanid dynasty. The last Parthian king, Vologases VI, issued his last dated coin in A.D. 228. The Sasanians would rule Iran until the Islamic conquest in A.D. 641. The Sasanians were ardent Zoroastrians in conflict with their Armenian subjects who originally were Zoroastrians but subsequently embraced Christianity. The years of Sasanid rule saw a continuation of the struggle between Persia and Rome begun in the Parthian period. References to Parthia by Romans after A.D. 228 are to the Sasanid empire.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

view all

Vologaeses V, King of Parthia's Timeline

145
145
Armenia, (Parthia), Turkey
169
169
Age 23
Armenia, (Parthia), Turkey
170
170
Age 24
Armenia
208
208
Age 63
Armenia, (Parthia), Turkey
????
????
????
????
Armenia, (Parthia), Turkey
????