long before assumed, of "king of kings." with him a treaty of friendship and alliance. | accustomed title, which the Arsacidæ had But presently he began to suspect the designs of the Romans, and he resolved to remain neutral, thinking that the victory of either party would be equally dangerous to himself. Memnon and Appian say that he made secret promises to both. Plutarch seems to be wrong in making the embassy of Phraates to Lucullus precede that of Lucullus to Phraates. He adds, that when Lucullus discovered Phraates's breach of faith, he resolved to attack Parthia, but was compelled to give up the attempt by a mutiny among his soldiers. These events happened in B.C. 69. (Memnon, ap. Photium, Cod. 224, p. 239, ed. Bekker; Appian, De Bello Mithridatico, 87; Dion Cassius, xxxv. 1, 3, 6; Plutarch, Lucullus, 30, 31.) When Pompey superseded Lucullus in the war against Mithridates (B.c. 66), he renewed the treaty with Phraates (Dion Cassius, xxxvi. 28; Li- | vius, Epitome of Book C); but a quarrel, which nearly led to war, soon happened between them on the following occasion:Tigranes, the third and only surviving son of Tigranes, king of Armenia, had revolted against his father, and, having been defeated by him in battle, had fled to Phraates, who gave him his daughter in marriage, and at his instigation marched an army into Armenia. Tigranes, the king, withdrew into the mountains, and Phraates, having laid siege to Artaxata, returned into Parthia, leaving the young Tigranes to carry on the siege. No sooner had Phraates departed, than the young Tigranes was attacked, and completely defeated by his father. He fled to his grandfather, Mithridates, but, finding that Mithridates had lost all power to protect him, he threw himself into the hands of Pompey, who used him as his guide in the invasion of Armenia. Tigranes, the king, surrendered to Pompey in such a manner as to excite his pity; and, at the same time, his indignation was aroused by the disrespectful demeanour of the young Tigranes to his father. In the settlement of the affairs of Armenia, Pompey assigned the district of Sophanene to the young Tigranes. This prince was dissatisfied with the arrangement, and claimed also certain treasures which were in that district; and a dispute followed, which ended in Pompey's casting him into chains, and reserving him for his triumph. Phraates now sent to Pompey to demand that the young prince, as his son-in-law, should be given up to him; and, at the same time, he sought to renew his alliance with the Romans, and proposed that the Euphrates should be fixed as the boundary between the dominions of Parthia and those of Rome. Pompey replied that Tigranes belonged rather to his father than to his father-in-law, and that, as for the boundary, he would determine what was just. This answer, perhaps, offended Phraates even less than Pompey's refusal to give him the ARSACES XIII., MITHRIDATES III. ('Apoáкns Milpidáтns), king of PARTHIA, succeeded his father, according to Justin, at the close of the Armenian war, upon his return from which he was expelled from the kingdom by the Parthian senate, on account of his cruelty, and was succeeded by his brother Orodes. From this meagre account we may infer that, as soon as these two princes had murdered their father, they naturally fell out about the succession to the kingdom, and that Orodes, taking advantage of the absence of Mithridates in Armenia, and, having won the support of the tributary chiefs, succeeded in expelling his brother after a short struggle, during which Mithridates treated the adherents of Orodes with great cruelty. Orodes suffered him, however, to retain the sovereignty of Media, where probably Mithridates had a strong party, for we soon find Orodes attacking him again, and driving him out of this possession also. The above seems to be the true explanation of the statement of Dion Cassius, that "when Phraates had been treacherously murdered by his sons, Orodes succeeded to his kingdom, and expelled his brother Mithridates from Media, over which he ruled." Mithridates fled to Gabinius, the Roman governor of Syria (B.c. 55), and persuaded him to effect his restoration; but Gabinius, happening just at the same time to receive a similar request from Ptolemy Auletes, the expelled king of Egypt, who | and advanced as far as Antioch; but that supported his prayer with an enormous bribe, deserted the cause of Mithridates, and left him to his fate. Mithridates, however, collected some sort of an army, and held possession of Babylon, where he was besieged by Orodes for a considerable time. At length the place was compelled by famine to surrender, and Mithridates, trusting to the power of relationship (so Justin says, but the statement is hard to believe of a parricide), gave himself up willingly to his brother, who commanded him to be put to death before his face. (Justin, xlii. 4; Dion Cassius, xxxix. 56; Appian, De Rebus Syriacis, 51; Josephus, Jewish War, i. 8, § 7.) P. S. ARSACES XIV., ORO'DES I. ('Aрσáкns 'Opwdns), king of PARTHIA, succeeded his brother, Arsaces XIII., or perhaps rather his father, Arsaces XII., as related in the preceding article [ARSACES XIII.]. In his reign the often-postponed conflict with Rome was brought to a crisis, and the Roman army under M. Crassus was destroyed by Surena, the general of Orodes, in B.C. 53. At this time the Parthian kingdom included eighteen satrapies, and had the Euphrates for its western boundary. (Appian, De Rebus Syriacis, 48; Pliny, Historia Naturalis, vi. 13, 25, 26.) The old Scythian mode of warfare, in which the cavalry were trained to act as archers, either advancing or retreating, perplexed the Roman generals; and the distance of Parthia from Rome made the enterprise more hazardous, but also more the object of ambition. The defeat of Crassus, however, placed the eastern provinces of the Roman empire in the unusual position of being obliged to defend themselves against the threatened attack of a formidable enemy. The consternation which pervaded those provinces found a lively expression in the letters of the unwarlike Cicero, who was pro-consul in Cilicia in B.C. 51, and who regarded the chain of Amanus as a weak defence against the victorious Parthians. In the meantime, however, the victory of Surena was not followed up with adequate vigour, partly through the jealousy of Orodes towards Surena, whom he put to death, giving the command of the army to his own youthful son, Pacorus, and partly through the time which the Parthians spent in confirming their power on the east of the Euphrates. It was not till the year 51 B.C. that they passed the Euphrates, and invaded Syria, and this only with a small force, which was easily driven back by C. Cassius. Orodes now prepared for a more serious attack upon the Roman empire. He collected a large army, which he placed nominally under the command of his son Pacorus, with whom however was joined, as the real commander, an experienced general named Osaces. This army invaded Syria in B.C. 50, city being skilfully defended by Cassius, the The whole army by the sword and by desertion, | march against the united forces of Phraates and himself fell into the hands of Ventidius. and the Median Artavasdes (B.c. 36). Ventidius soon afterwards obtained another campaign of Antony was at first successvictory over the Parthian general, Pharna- ful: he took Vera (Strabo, p. 523), and laid bates, in consequence of which all Syria siege to Praaspa or Phraata, the residence of yielded to the Romans. Pacorus approached the kings of Atropatene. But the kings of with a new army to revenge the defeats of Media and Parthia destroyed a strong body his general, and a pitched battle with the of Romans, commanded by Statianus, who was Romans took place in the district of Cyr- on his march to Praaspa; and, at the same rhestica, the north-eastern corner of Syria, in time, the king of Armenia separated his which the Parthians were routed, and lost troops from those of the Romans, and withtheir gallant chief, Pacorus. Ventidius thus drew to his dominions. Antony was conserevenged the defeat of Crassus, and his vic- quently obliged to raise the siege, and to retory was the more acceptable to the Romans treat towards the Araxes, which separated as it was obtained on the 9th of June, B.C. 38, Atropatene from Armenia; but he was hathe fifteenth anniversary of the defeat of rassed by Phraates, and was near suffering Crassus. The consequence of this victory the fate of Crassus. The dangerous Parfor Antony was the re-establishment of his thian bowmen, however, who had made such authority in all those provinces which had havoc among the soldiers of Crassus, were been conquered by the Parthians; but instead kept at distance by the archers and slingers of rewarding Ventidius, he treated him with of Antony, who was prevented from getting ingratitude. The ruin of his army, the loss into an ambush of the Parthians by the of his conquests, and the death of his fa- secret information of Monæses; and when vourite son was a hard blow for the aged Antony appeared once more to be in great Orodes, who showed his grief by fasting and danger, Monæses again informed him that mournful silence. Nor was the loss of the Phraates did not intend to pursue him begallant and generous Pacorus less felt by yond a certain river which they would soon the Parthians, among whom he had enjoyed reach. This information proved to be corgreat popularity. Obliged by age and in- rect; and a short time afterwards Antony, to firmities to select a co-regent and future the greatest joy of his soldiers, reached and successor among his thirty sons, Orodes safely crossed the Araxes, after having lost chose Phraates [ARSACES XV.], the un- the fifth part of his army. A favourable worthiest of all, who began his reign by occasion of taking vengeance on the faithless putting his father to death. (Dion Cassius, Artavasdes of Armenia, and of restoring the xxxix. 56, &c., xl. 12—30, xli. 55, xliv. 45, honour of his arms by another campaign xlviii. 24—41, xlix. 19-23; Plutarch, Cras- against the Parthians, soon presented itself sus, 18, &c., Antonius, 33, 34, Pompeius, 52; to Antony. Differences having arisen beAppian, Bell. Civ., ii. 18, iv. 59, 63, v. 10, tween Phraates and his ally Artavasdes of 65, 75, 133, Bell. Syr., 51; Josephus, Jewish Media, the latter concluded an alliance with War, i. 11; Florus, iii. 11, iv. 9; Velleius Antony, who opened the field (B.c. 34) with Paterculus, ii. 78; Justin, xlii. 4, 5; Vaillant, a campaign in Armenia, made the Armenian Arsacidarum Imperium, vol. i. pp. 108-146.) Artavasdes a prisoner, and sent him to AlexP. S. andria, with his whole family, except one ARSACES XV., PRHAATES IV., king son, Artaxias, whom the Armenians afterof PARTHIA, attempted to secure himself on wards chose in the place of his father. A his throne by putting to death his father, proposed marriage between Antony's son his brothers, and his own son, as well as Alexander, and a daughter of the Median many noble and distinguished Parthians Artavasdes, was designed to strengthen the (B.C. 37). Among these was Monæses, who political ties between the two allies, and the fled to Antony, and persuaded him to make position of Phraates became, consequently, war upon Phraates; a proposal which was very critical, when the fears of the Parthian accepted by Antony, who promised Monæses king were greatly diminished by the apthat he should lead the Roman army, and proaching contest between Antony and Octasucceed Phraates on the Parthian throne. vianus. When Antony set out to meet his Arsaces, however, persuaded Monæses to re- rival, Phraates invaded Armenia, and had turn to Parthia; but Antony soon found that Artaxias, the son of Artavasdes, chosen king Monæses was as useful to him at the court by the inhabitants; he also conquered Meof the Parthian king as he would have been dia; but, having lost his popularity by his in the Roman camp. There was less sin- cruelty, he had to contend with a rebel, cerity in the friendship of the Armenian Tiridates, by whom he was driven out. He king, Artavasdes, who, on the pretext of dif- fled to the Scythians, with whose assistance ferences with Arsaces, king of Parthia, and he recovered his throne. The usurper fled Artavasdes, king of Media Atropatene, to Octavianus, then Augustus, having taken offered his assistance to Antony, who ac- with him a young son of Phraates, whom he cepted it, and, at the head of one hundred presented to Augustus. This event has been thousand men, traversed Armenia on his commemorated by a silver medal (Vaillant, cited below, vol. i. p. 172). An embassy | which Phraates sent to Rome (B.C. 23) for the purpose of persuading Augustus to surrender Tiridates and the son of Phraates, only succeeded in delivering the young prince, whom Augustus gave up on the condition of Phraates surrendering the Roman prisoners and standards which the Parthians had taken in their campaigns against Crassus and Antony. Phraates delayed the fulfilment of this condition till B.C. 20, when Augustus, on his tour to the East, visited Syria, and the arrival of the prisoners at Rome was celebrated by festivities. Augustus ordered the standards to be kept in a small temple, which he built for the purpose, and dedicated to Mars Ultor; he ordered a triumphal arch to be erected, and he made a solemn entry into Rome. There were also medals struck in commemoration of the day: on the reverse of one there is a Parthian king kneeling, who presents a standard, with the inscription CAESAR. AVGVSTVS. SIGN. RECEPT.; and on another medal there is a triumphal arch, under which Augustus sits in a quadriga, with the inscription CIVIB. ET SIGN. MILIT. A PARTHIS RECVP. (Vaillant, vol. i. p. 176). The poets also contributed to celebrate a day which filled the mind of the Romans with pride, and soothed the grief of those whose brethren had perished with Crassus. (Ovid, Trist. ii. 228, Art. Am. i. 179, &c., Fast. vi. 465, &c.; Horace, Epist. i. 18, 56, Carm. iv. 15, 6.) In order to strengthen his friendly relations with Augustus, Phraates sent four of his sons, with their wives and children, as voluntary hostages to Rome, unless we credit Josephus (Jewish Antiq. xviii. 2, § 4), who states that Thermusa, a Roman woman who was charged to accompany the young son of Phraates when he was sent back by Augustus to his father, and whom Phraates afterwards married, had persuaded the king to send his children to Rome, with the view of making | hers and the king's son, Phraataces, his father's successor. Tacitus (Annal. ii. 1) says that Phraates had sent them to Rome, not through fear of the Romans, but from distrust of his own subjects. It is very likely that each of these circumstances had its share in deciding Phraates to such a step. His children, whom Strabo (p. 748) calls Saraspades, Cerospades, Phraanas, and Boones, two of whom were accompanied by their wives and four male children, were very well received by Augustus, who used to accompany them to the public entertainments, where places of honour were arranged for them close to the seat of the emperor. The peace between Augustus and Phraates was disturbed by the latter, who, in A.D. 2, drove out Artavasdes, whom Augustus had made king of Armenia; but Caius Cæsar and M. Lollius having been despatched to settle the question, the good understanding between the two monarchs was soon restored. Phraates died in the year of the consulate of Sextus Aelius Cato and C. Sentius Saturninus, in A.D. 4, having been poisoned by his wife Thermusa; he was succeeded by his son Phraataces. (Dion Cassius, xlix. 23— 31, 44, liii. 33, liv. 8, lv. 11; Plutarch, Antonius, 37-56; Suetonius, Octavianus, 18, 21, 43: Tacitus, Annales, 1—4; Livy, Epit. 130; Justinus, xlii. 5: Velleius Paterculus, ii. 100; Josephus, Jewish Antiq. xviii. 2; Vaillant, Arsacidarum Imperium, vol. i. pp. 147-186). W. P. ARSACES XVI., PHRAATA'CES, king of PARTHIA, the son and successor of Arsaces XV. (Phraates IV.), was said to have participated in the murder of his father, and to have lived in incestuous intercourse with his mother, Thermusa. He was about twentyfive when he came to the throne. His vices caused a rebellion, in consequence of which he was dethroned, and put to death with his mother. According to Vaillant he reigned only a few months in a.u. 757 (A.D. 4). His successor was Orodes II. (Arsaces XVII). Neither Phraataces nor Orodes II. is mentioned by the oriental writers on Persian history, whose accounts and names differ generally very much from those of the Roman and Greek historians. (Josephus, Jewish Antiq. xviii. 2; Vaillant, Arsacidarum Imperium, vol. i. pp. 187-189.) W. P. ARSACES XVII., ORÓ'DES II., king of PARTHIA, was an Arsacide, who was so cruel that a short time after his accession he was murdered at a feast by some of his exasperated subjects, in the same year in which his predecessor was killed, A.D. 4. His successor was Vonones I. (Arsaces XVIII.) (Josephus, Jewish Antiq. xviii. 2; Tacitus, Annales, ii. 1-4; Vaillant, Arsacid. Imp. vol. i. p. 189 190.) W. P. ARSACES XVIII., VONO'NES I., king of PARTHIA, was, according to Tacitus, the eldest of the four sons of Phraates IV. (Arsaces XV.) who lived as hostages at Rome, and he is probably the Boones of Strabo. The Parthians having chosen him king after the murder of Orodes II., Augustus allowed him to leave Rome, and to ascend the throne of his ancestors. During his long sojourn at Rome he had adopted the manners of the Romans; he neglected hunting, the favourite occupation of the Parthians; he was surrounded by Greeks; and towards his subjects he showed an urbanity which would have been admired by Romans and Greeks, but which contrasted strangely with the ceremonies of oriental courts. The Parthians soon disliked him, and their national pride was wounded by their suspicion that Parthia was going to become a Roman province. The chief adversaries of Vonones offered the crown to Artabanus, an Arsacide, who, according to Josephus, was king of Media, and who compelled Vonones to fly to Armenia. The throne of all attempts on this country; and as his principal object was apparently to maintain himself on the Parthian throne, which he thought menaced by Vonones in Syria, he was prudent enough to enter into friendly negociations with the Romans. He was able to disguise his secret apprehensions of his rival under the pretext that the presence of Vonones in Syria would be the cause of differences between him and the Romans; and he sent ambassadors to Germanicus for the purpose of concluding a treaty of friendship. Having thus nothing to fear from the Romans, he sent an army, under his son-in-law Mithridates, into Mesopotamia and Babylonia, where two brothers, Asinæus and Anilæus, had succeeded in making themselves independent. For some time Artabanus flattered these chiefs, and invited them to appear at his court, where they were well received; but Asinæus having been poisoned by the wife of Anilæus, the surviving brother began hostilities against Artabanus. Mithridates, however, was not successful; his army was routed, and himself was made prisoner by Anilæus, who sent him back to Artabanus, after having promenaded him naked on an Mithridates having approached with a new army, an engagement ensued, in which Anilæus was defeated, and he was afterwards killed by the Babylonians. [ANILÆUS.] this country being vacant by the deposition | army in Armenia prevented Artabanus from of queen Erato, the Armenians chose Vonones for their king (A.D. 16). Vonones maintained himself only one year on the throne, as he was compelled to fly into Syria through fear of Artabanus. Creticus Silanus, the præfect of Syria, allowed him to stay in that country, and Vonones lived at Antioch in royal splendour. Suetonius states that he was murdered by order of Tiberius on account of his riches; but Tacitus gives a different and more detailed account. Artabanus having demanded the removal of Vonones to some place more distant from the limits of Armenia, Vonones was brought to Pompeiopolis in Cilicia, by order of Germanicus, who, however, acted thus less with the intention of complying with the wishes of Artabanus than of annoying Cneius Piso, with whom, and his wife Plancina, Vonones was on very friendly terms. At Pompeiopolis, Vonones was kept in prison, but treated with royal honours. He bribed his guards and escaped; his intention being to go first to Armenia, thence to the Albani and Heniochi beyond the Caucasus, and finally to take refuge with a Scythian king who was his relative. He took his way across the wildest mountains on horseback, as if he were hunting, and he soon reached the river Pyramus. But the rumour of his flight had spread among the inhabitants before the king arrived, they had broken the bridge over the river, and there was no ford. He was thus overtaken by the præfectus equitum Vibius Fronto, and soon afterwards joined by his former gaoler Remmius, who killed Vonones on the spot, in a fit of anger, as he alleged, but probably by the orders of Piso; for it seems that Vonones was acquainted with some great crime of which Piso was suspected, and that he would have compromised Piso, and probably Tiberius, if he had been allowed to speak (A.D. 19). According to Tacitus, Vo nones left a son whose name he does not men- ass. The death of Germanicus, in A.D. 19, opened a new field to the ambition of Artabanus. He had esteemed the Roman general while living, and he honoured his memory by renouncing the royal pleasure of hunting, and by withdrawing from the society of the Megistani, or such of the officers of the royal household in whose company the Parthian kings used to spend their leisure hours. (Suetonius, Caligula, 5.) But no sooner was Artabanus delivered from the fear of Germanicus, than he changed his conduct towards the Romans. Exalted by his victories over his Oriental neighbours, and despising the unwarlike age of Tiberius, he showed himself haughty towards the Romans and cruel towards his subjects. After the death of the Armenian king Artaxias (before A.D. 35), he seized the government of Armenia, and put his eldest son Arsaces on the throne, sending at the same time ambassadors to Rome to claim the treasures (perhaps those of the crown) which Vonones had taken with him when he fled to Syria: and he boasted that he would extend his empire over all the countries once possessed by Cyrus and Alexander. His haughtiness and cruelty produced discontent among his subjects. In the consulate of C. Cestius and M. Servilius (A.D. 35) some Parthian agents appeared in Rome, sent thither secretly by some aristocratic malcontents, headed by Sinnaces, who was distinguished by birth and wealth, and Abdus, who was likewise a |