110

sary cruelty. On his return, he summoned the satraps of Western Asia to appear before his tribunal, and answer for their disobedience. Antigonus, seeing his danger, entered into a league with Ptolemy, the satrap of Egypt, Antipater, the governor of Macedon, and several other noblemen, to crush the regency. Perdiccas, on the other hand, leaving Eumenes to guard Lower Asia, marched with the choicest divisions of the royal army against Ptolemy, whose ability he dreaded even more than his power. Antipater and Craterus were early in the field. They crossed the Hellespont with the army that had been left for the defence of Macedon, and, on their landing, were joined by Neoptolemus, the governor of Phrygia. Their new confederate informed the Macedonian leaders that the army of Eumenes was weak, disorderly, and incapable of making the least resistance. Seduced by this false information, they divided their forces; Antipater hastening through Phrygia in pursuit of Perdiccas, while Craterus and Neoptolemus marched against Eumenes. They encountered him in the Trojan plain, and were completely defeated. Neoptolemus was slain in the first onset, and Craterus lay mortally wounded, undistinguished among the heaps of dead. Eumenes, having learned the state of Craterus, hastened to relieve him. He found him in the agonies of death, and bitterly lamented the misfortunes that had changed old friends into bitter enemies.

Immediately after this great victory, Eumenes sent intelligence of his success to Perdiccas; but, two days before the messenger reached the royal camp, the regent was no more. His army, wearied by the long siege of Pelusium, became dissatisfied. Their mutinous dispositions were secretly encouraged by the emissaries of Ptolemy. Python, who had been formerly employed by the regent in the ruthless massacre of some Greek mercenaries for disobedience of orders, organized a conspiracy, and Perdiccas was murdered in his tent, 321 B. C. Had the news of the victory obtained by Eumenes reached the camp earlier, the regent's life might have been saved; but now the news served only to aggravate the malice of the insurgent satraps.

promote civilization. Accordingly, he built several cities, the most celebrated of which were Antioch, in Syria, and Seleucia, near Babylon. In peopling them, he gave great privileges to the Jews.

From this period, the history of Seleucus belongs to Syria, as he removed his capital to Antioch, and considered Syria the central part of his empire. He was treacherously killed, 280 B. C., in the eighty-second year of his age, by Ptolemy Ceraunus, who had fled from Egypt, and whom he had hospitably received. His successors, called Seleucida, were twenty-one in number, and reigned over Syria till the country was conquered by the Roman general Pompey, 65 B. C.

Seleucus is much praised by ancient writers. He was endowed with great personal strength and courage, and seems to have possessed some generous qualities. His ability as a general, and wisdom as a statesman, were of a superior order, and placed him at the head of the successors of the great Macedonian.

This brief outline shows that the gigantic empire of Alexander continued in his own hands but about ten years. It then fell to pieces, and became the spoil of his greedy followers, in which not a single descendant of the founder was allowed to participate. The city of Alexandria, an enduring memorial of his policy, is the only conspicuous object which bears his name.

Beside the grand divisions of Alexander's empire already noticed, and whose history will be given in the course of our work, several small kingdoms sprung up in Western Asia of considerable historical interest. Among them were Pergamus, Bithynia, Paphlagonia, Pontus, Cappadocia, Greater Armenia, Lesser Armenia, to which may be added the commercial state of Petra and the republic of Rhodes. These also will be duly noticed in their place.

CHAPTER LXIII.

280 to 272 B. C.

Parthian Dominion in Persia The Sassanians - Shahpoor - Hormisdas. LEAVING the further history of Alexander's succes

Ptolemy became king of Egypt, including some contiguous territory in Asia. His dynasty, embracing thirteen kings, continued for about two hundred and ninety years, when Egypt was conquered by Rome. Lysimachus obtained Thrace, to which were attached the northern provinces of Asia Minor. Cassander took possession of Macedon and Greece, with the rich province of Cilicia.

Seleucus, surnamed Nicator, or Conqueror, received the dominion of Upper Asia, of which Babylon was the centre; and here, for a time, he had his capital. He extended his empire, which is said at last to have embraced all the nations conquered by Alexander, from Phrygia to the Indus. He was now at leisure to

cida continued undisturbed for more than half a century, when, about 250 B. C., the Parthians made the first attempt to snatch the sceptre from them. Arsaces, a noble of that country, raised a rebellion, expelled the Macedonians from Parthia, and assumed the title of a king. In a moment of victory, however, he was mortally wounded, and died bequeathing his crown to his brother Tiridates, and his name to the Parthian dynasty. The history of this monarchy will be found in another part of our work.

The Parthian dominion in Persia endured nearly five hundred years. This long period is little better than a blank in the Eastern histories; yet, when we refer to Roman writers, we find this space abounding in events of which a gallant nation might well be proud. Parthian monarchs, whose names cannot now be discovered in the history of their own country, were the only enemies upon whom the Roman arms, in the fulness of their power, could make no permanent impres sion. But this, no doubt, may be attributed to other

causes than the skill and valor of the Parthians. It was to the nature of their country and their singular mode of warfare that they owed their frequent advantages over the disciplined legions of Rome. The frontier which the kingdom of Parthia presented to the Roman empire extended from the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf. It consisted of lofty and barren mountains, of broad and rapid streams, and of wide-spreading deserts. In whatever direction the legions of Rome advanced, the country was laid waste. The mode in which the Parthian warrior took his unerring aim, while his horse was carrying him from his enemy, baffled all the efforts of Roman skill and courage, and the bravest veterans of the empire murmured when their leaders talked of a Parthian war.

The commencement of the Sassanian dynasty, A. D. 226, forms a new era in the history of Persia. These monarchs were engaged in constant wars with the Roman empire, and the events recorded by the historians of Rome enable us to correct the accounts of Oriental authors. This dynasty was founded by Ardeshir Babigan, a descendant of Sassan, the grandson of Isfundear. A rapid rise in the service of the Parthian king intoxicated his ardent mind, and dreams, the offspring of ambitious hopes, confirmed his aspiring designs. Driven from court, he was received with acclamation by the nobility of the province of Fars. His resolution to aim at sovereign power was encour aged by the feebleness of the imperial armies. The Persians flocked around his standard, Arduan, the reigning king, took the field to quell the rebellion. The armies met in the plain of Hoormaz, a desperate battle ensued, Arduan lost his crown and his life, and Ardeshir was saluted on the field of victory with the title of Shahan Shah, or King of Kings-a name ever since assumed by the sovereigns of Persia.

Ardeshir took advantage of the impression made by this great victory not only to subdue the remainder of the empire, but to enlarge its limits, which he extended, if we may credit Persian authors, to the Euphra, tes in one quarter, and the kingdom of Kharism in the other. The fame of Ardeshir spread in every direction. All the petty states in the vicinity of his empire proffered submission, while the greatest monarchs of the East and West courted his friendship. He was one of the wisest princes that ever reigned over Persia. The revolution which he effected in the condition of his country was wonderful. He formed a well-consolidated empire out of the scattered fragments of the Parthian monarchy, which had been in an unsettled and distracted state for centuries. The name of Parthia, which Western writers had given to this empire after the death of Alexander, ceased at his elevation to the throne, and the kingdom which he founded was recognized as that of Persia.

111

One of the characteristic features in the government of Ardeshir was his zeal to sustain the ancient religion, which had been neglected or degraded by the Parthian monarchs. This zeal was as much the offspring of policy as of piety. He summoned a great assembly of mobuds and priests from all parts of the kingdom, to assist in this religious reform; and the event is still regarded as most important, even in the history of the creed of Zoroaster. The testamentary advice which Ardeshir addressed to his son, as recorded by Firdusi, exhibits his views of religion and of the duties of a sovereign in a very favorable light.

Shahpoor, called by the Western writers Sapor, succeeded his father Árdeshir. He carried his arms into the Roman territories, and the emperor Valerian, then in his 70th year, marched against him. The Romans were defeated, and Valerian was taken prisoner. The treatment of the captive emperor has been the theme of many a singular tale. It is said that the Persian monarch exposed him to the public gaze as a monument of fallen greatness; that he used his neck as a footstool whenever he mounted his horse, and that he finally caused the wretched Valerian to be flayed alive, and his skin to be stuffed and preserved in the chief temple of the empire as a trophy of victory! These accounts are not well authenticated; but it is certain that the Roman emperor passed the remainder of his life in helpless captivity. Odenathus, prince of Palmyra, and after him the emperor Aurelian, avenged, at length, the Roman honor; but Shahpoor, after building various cities, and conquering many provinces, bequeathed his dominions, A. D. 271, to his son, Hormisdas.

The Persian histories relate a very extraordinary adventure of Hormisdas, before he ascended the throne. His father had appointed him governor of Khorosan, where he highly distinguished himself. His conduct, however, did not prevent some envious and designing men from exciting suspicions of his fidelity, in the breast of Shahpoor. Hormisdas was soon made acquainted with the success of his enemies, and resolved on a desperate action. He cut off one of his hands and sent it to his father, desiring him to accept that unquestionable proof of his devoted allegiance. Shahpoor was horror-struck at the rash act which his suspicions had led his son to commit. He recalled him to court, and from that time gave him his full confidence. This virtuous prince reigned but one year. He founded a city called by his own name, where, at this day, the inhabitants show an orangetree believed to have been planted by him, and which, on this account, is universally venerated.

THE reign of Baharam I., the Varanes of the Greek writers, is remarkable for the execution of Mani, the founder of the sect of Manichæans, who attempted to amalgamate the doctrine of Zoroaster, the metempsychosis of the Hindoos, and the tenets of Christianity into one religious code. Driven from

CHAPTER LXVII.

to the nobility, and, in prosperous times, it must have been generally diffused over the empire. That such luxury could not have existed without many of the arts of peace, and a certain progress in civilization, is obvious; but this progress was continually retarded by the internal wars consequent upon the system of the government.

That the ancient Persians inhabited towns and cities, is proved both by history and by the antiquity of some of the most extensive ruins now visible. In the earliest ages of which we have any knowledge, they must have depended more upon agriculture than on their flocks for support, as we are assured that they long held animal food in abhorrence. The ancient Persians were athletic and strong, and of a good personal appearance. Some of their descendants are now settled on the western coast of Hindostan : these persons are of pure blood, and never intermarry with any other race. But after a residence of eleven hundred years in an enervating climate, they are still superior to the modern inhabitants of Persia, who belong to a great number of mixed races that have poured into the kingdom since the overthrow of Yezdijird and the establishment of Mahometanism.

The Persian troops, in the days of Cyrus, were looked upon as invincible. This is ascribed to the temperate and laborious life to which they were accustomed from infancy. They drank only water; their food was bread and roots, and the bare ground generally their bed. They were also inured to the most painful exercises and labors. They were trained up to military service from their most tender years, by passing through different exercises. They served in the army from the age of twenty to that of fifty, and whether in peace or war, they always wore swords, as was the custom in most European countries till within a century. The hardy education of the Persians, however, belongs only to the age of Cyrus, and perhaps a short period afterward. When we compare the manners of these times with those of a later age, they hardly seem to indicate the same people. The conquests of Cyrus led to the corruption of the Persian manners. The ancient, simple attire was exchanged for foreign apparel-shining with gold and purple. Luxury and extravagance soon rose to a ruinous excess. The monarch carried all his wives with him to the wars, and his chief officers followed his example. The most exquisite meats and costly dainties were provided for the commanders of armies during the whole of their campaigns. This luxury, we are told by Plato, was one of the causes of the decline of the Persian empire. Another was the want of public faith. The primitive Persians prided themselves upon keeping their word; but the servile flatterers of the great king relapsed into falsehood, deceit, and perjury, and sacrificed every thing to the humor of the despot.

The lesson taught by the history of Persia is the same as that which we gather from the annals of Greece and Rome. Corruption of public morals inevitably leads to political disease and dissolution. A sound moral basis is as essential to the durability of government as a good foundation to the stability of an architectural edifice.

the ancient Persians.

THE manners of the Persians, it is true, were softened, and in some degree refined, by a spirit of chivalry which prevailed in Persia between the time of Cyrus and that of Alexander. Courage was hardly held in more esteem than generosity and humanity; and the first heroes in the Persian romantic histories are not more praised for valor than for clemency and munificence. If we may believe Firdusi, the laws of modern honor were well understood and practised by the ancient Persians. The great respect in which the female sex was held, was, no doubt, the principal cause of their progress in civilization. men had an honorable rank in Persian society. The warriors, as an incentive to courage, often took with them to battle their wives and children.

Wo

The residence of the Persian kings varied with the season, during the early ages of the empire. The court was held generally about seven months at Babylon, three at Susa, or Shushan, and two at Ecbatana. At a later date, Persepolis became the chief capital. The royal palace in this city was very magnificent, and its furniture of inestimable value. According to the description of Herodotus, the walls and ceilings of the apartments were entirely covered with gold, silver, ivory, and amber. The throne was of fine gold, supported by four pillars richly adorned with precious stones. The same author describes a vine of gold, presented to Darius by Pythias, a Lydian, of which the trunk and branches were enriched with jewels of great value. The clusters of grapes which hung over the king's head, as he sat on the throne, were all composed of precious stones. Adjoining the palace were fine gardens, parks, &c.

Nushirvan was the first monarch whom historians mention as the founder of a college; but the mobuds, or priests, had their books of religion at an early period, and the chronicles of the kings of Persia were preserved with great care. It is not easy to ascertain how far learning was cultivated by the ancient Persians. Their wise men were distinguished for their knowledge of astrology, which implies some acquaintance with the science of astronomy; but this study, as well as most others, appears to have been confined to the priesthood. Whatever treasures in science and learning the ancient Persians may have possessed, they are now irrecoverably lost. The reign of Nushirvan is said to have been the Augustan era of Persian literature; but the learned men of Rome, who resorted to the court of that monarch, returned disappointed at not finding so advanced a state of knowl edge as they had expected.

Persia, however, is the earliest country in which we find the use of regular posts and couriers. This invention is ascribed to Cyrus, and by some writers to Darius. As the empire, by conquests, had become greatly enlarged, it was essential that all the governors of the provinces should send accounts to the seat of government, at stated times, of every thing that passed in their several districts. To accomplish this with the greater despatch, post-houses were built, and messengers stationed in every province. At all these stations were large stables, with relays of horses, postmasters, &c., so that the couriers were kept going day and night.