_Administration of Persia under Chosroes I. Fourfold Division of the
Empire. Careful Surveillance of those entrusted with Poiver. Severe
Punishment of Abuse of Trust. New System of Taxation introduced.
Correction of Abuse connected with the Military Service. Encouragement
of Agriculture and Marriage. Belief of Poverty. Care for Travellers.
Encouragement of Learning. Practice of Toleration within certain Limits.
Domestic Life of Chosroes. His Wives. Revolt and Death of his Son,
Nushizad. Coins of Chosroes. Estimate of his Character._
A general consensus of the Oriental writers marks the reign of the first
Chosroes as a period not only of great military activity, but also
of improved domestic administration. Chosroes found the empire in a
disordered and ill-regulated condition, taxation arranged on a bad
system, the people oppressed by unjust and tyrannical governors,
the military service a prey to the most scandalous abuses, religious
fanaticism rampant, class at variance with class, extortion and wrong
winked at, crime unpunished, agriculture languishing, and the masses
throughout almost the whole of the country sullen and discontented.
It was his resolve from the first to carry out a series of reforms--to
secure the administration of even-handed justice, to put the finances on
a better footing, to encourage agriculture, to relieve the poor and the
distressed, to root out the abuses that destroyed the efficiency of the
army, and to excise the gangrene of fanaticism which was eating into
the heart of the nation. How he effected the last named object by
his wholesale destruction of the followers of Mazdak has been already
related; but it appeared unadvisable to interrupt, the military history
of the reign by combining with it any account of the numerous other
reforms which he accomplished. It remains therefore to consider them in
this place, since they are certainly not the least remarkable among the
many achievements of this great monarch.
Persia, until the time of Anushirwan, had been divided into a multitude
of provinces, the satraps or governors of which held their office
directly under the crown. It was difficult for the monarch to exercise
a sufficient superintendence over so large a number of rulers, many
of them remote from the court, and all united by a common interest.
Chosroes conceived the plan of forming four great governments, and
entrusting them to four persons in whom he had confidence, whose duty
it should be to watch the conduct of the provincial satraps to control
them, direct them, or report their misconduct to the crown. The four
great governments were those of the east, the north, the south, and
the west. The east comprised Khorassan, Seistan, and Kirman; the north,
Armenia, Azer-bijan, Ghilan, Koum, and Isfahan; the south, Fars and
Ahwaz; the west, Irak, or Babylonia, Assyria, and Mesopotamia.
It was not the intention of the monarch, however, to put a blind trust
in his instruments. He made personal progresses through his empire from,
time to time, visiting each province in turn and inquiring into the
condition of the inhabitants. He employed continually an army of
inspectors and spies, who reported to him from all quarters the
sufferings or complaints of the oppressed, and the neglects or misdoings
of those in authority. On the occurrence of any specially suspicious
circumstance, he appointed extraordinary commissions of inquiry,
which, armed with all the power of the crown, proceeded to the suspected
quarter, took evidence, and made a careful report of whatever wrongs or
malpractices they discovered.
When guilt was brought home to incriminated persons or parties, the
punishment with which they were visited was swift and signal. We have
seen how harsh were the sentences passed by Chosroes upon those whose
offences attacked his own person or dignity. An equal severity appears
in his judgments, where there was no question of his own wrongs, but
only of the interests of his subjects. On one occasion he is said to
have executed no fewer than eighty collectors of taxes on the report of
a commission charging them with extortion. Among the principal reforms
which Chosroes is said to have introduced was his fresh arrangement
of the taxation. Hitherto all lands had paid to the State a certain
proportion of their produce, a proportion which varied, according to the
estimated richness of the soil, from a tenth to one-half. The effect was
to discourage all improved cultivation, since it was quite possible that
the whole profit of any increased outlay might be absorbed by the State,
and also to cramp and check the liberty of the cultivators in various
ways, since the produce could not be touched until the revenue official
made his appearance and carried off the share of the crop which he had
a right to take. Chosroes resolved to substitute a land-tax for the
proportionate payments in kind, and thus at once to set the cultivator
at liberty with respect to harvesting his crops and to allow him the
entire advantage of any augumented production which might be secured by
better methods of farming his land. His tax consisted in part of a money
payment, in part of a payment in kind; but both payments were fixed and
invariable, each measure of ground being rated in the king’s books at
one dirhem and one measure of the produce. Uncultivated land, and land
lying fallow at the time, were exempt; and thus the scheme involved,
not one survey alone, but a recurring (annual) survey, and an annual
registration of all cultivators, with the quantity of land under
cultivation held by each, and the nature of the crop or crops to be
grown by them. The system was one of much complication, and may have
pressed somewhat hardly upon the poorer and less productive soils; but
it was an immense improvement upon the previously existing practice,
which had all the disadvantages of the modern tithe system, aggravated
by the high rates exacted and by the certainty that, in any disputed
case, the subject would have had a poor chance of establishing his right
against the crown. It is not surprising that the caliphs, when they
conquered Persia, maintained unaltered the land system of Chosroes which
they found established, regarding it as, if not perfect, at any rate not
readily admitting of much improvement.
Besides the tax upon arable lands, of which we have hitherto spoken,
Chosroes introduced into into Persia various other imposts. The fruit
trees were everywhere counted, and a small payment required for each.
The personality of the citizens was valued, and a graduated property-tax
established, which, however, in the case of the most opulent, did not
exceed the moderate sum of forty-eight dirhems (about twenty-seven
shillings). A poll-tax was required of Jews and Christians, whereof we
do not know the amount. From all these burdens liberal exemptions were
made on account of age and sex; no female paid anything; and males above
fifty years of age or under twenty were also free of charge. Due notice
was given to each individual of the sum for which he was liable, by
the publication in each province, town, and village, of a tax table, in
which each citizen or alien could see against his name the amount about
to be claimed of him, with the ground upon which it was regarded as due.
Payment had to made by instalments, three times each year, at the end of
every four months.
In order to prevent the unfair extortion, which in the ancient world
was always, with reason or without, charged upon collectors of revenue,
Chosroes, by the advice of the Grand Mobed, authorized the Magian
priests everywhere to exercise a supervision over the receivers of
taxes, and to hinder them from exacting more than their due. The priests
were only too happy to discharge this popular function; and extortion
must have become rare under a system which comprised so efficient a
safeguard.
Another change ascribed to Chosroes is a reform of the administration of
the army. Under the system previously existing, Chosroes found that
the resources of the state were lavishly wasted, and the result was a
military force inefficient and badly accoutred. No security was taken
that the soldiers possessed their proper equipments or could discharge
the duties appropriate to their several grades. Persons came before the
paymaster, claiming the wages of a cavalry soldier, who possessed
no horse, and had never learned to ride. Some, who called themselves
soldiers, had no knowledge of the use of any weapon at all; others
claimed for higher grades of the service than those whereto they really
belonged; those who drew the pay of cuirassiers were destitute of a coat
of mail; those who professed themselves archers were utterly incompetent
to draw the bow. The established rates of pay varied between a hundred
dirhems a year and four thousand, and persons entitled to the lowest
rate often received an amount not much short of the highest. The evil
was not only that the treasury was robbed by unfair claims and unfounded
pretences, but that artifice and false seeming were encouraged, while
at the same time the army was brought into such a condition that no
dependence could be placed upon it. If the number who actually served
corresponded to that upon the rolls, which is uncertain, at any rate all
the superior arms of the service fell below their nominal strength, and
the lower grades were crowded with men who were only soldiers in name.
As a remedy against these evils, Chosroes appointed a single
paymaster-general, and insisted on his carefully inspecting and
reviewing each body of troops before he allowed it to draw its pay. Each
man was to appear before him fully equipped and to show his proficiency
with his weapon or weapons; horse soldiers were to bring their horses,
and to exhibit their mastery over the animals by putting them through
their paces, mounting and dismounting, and performing the other usual
exercises. If any clumsiness were noted, or any deficiency in the
equipment, the pay was to be withheld until the defect observed had been
made good. Special care was to be taken that no one drew the pay of a
class superior to that whereto he really belonged--of an archer, for
instance, when he was in truth a common soldier, or of a trooper when he
served not in the horse, but in the foot.
A curious anecdote is related in connection with these military reforms.
When Babek, the new paymaster, was about to hold his first review, he
issued an order that all persons belonging to the army then present in
the capital should appear before him on a certain day. The troops came;
but Babek dismissed them on the ground that a certain person whose
presence was indispensable had not made his appearance. Another day
was appointed, with the same result, except that Babek on this occasion
plainly intimated that it was the king whom he expected to attend. Upon
this Chosroes, when a third summons was issued, took care to be present,
and came fully equipped, as he thought, for battle. But the critical
eye of the reviewing officer detected an omission, which he refused
to overlook--the king had neglected to bring with him two extra
bow-strings. Chosroes was required to go back to his palace and remedy
the defect, after which he was allowed to pass muster, and then summoned
to receive his pay. Babek affected to consider seriously what the pay of
the commander-in-chief ought to be, and decided that it ought to exceed
that of any other person in the army. He then, in the sight of all,
presented the king with four thousand and one dirhems, which Chosroes
received and carried home. Thus two important principles were thought
to be established--that no defect of equipment whatsoever should be
overlooked in any officer, however high his rank, and that none should
draw from the treasury a larger amount of pay than 4,000 dirhems (L112.
of our money).
The encouragement of agriculture was an essential element in the system
of Zoroaster; and Chosroes, in devoting his attention to it, was at once
performing a religious duty and increasing the resources of the state.
It was his earnest desire to bring into cultivation all the soil which
was capable of it; and with this object he not only issued edicts
commanding the reclamation of waste lands, but advanced from the
treasury the price of the necessary seed-corn, implements, and beasts
to all poor persons willing to carry out his orders. Other poor persons,
especially the infirm and those disabled by bodily defect, were relieved
from his privy purse; mendicancy was forbidden, and idleness made an
offence. The lands forfeited by the followers of Mazdak were distributed
to necessitous cultivators. The water system was carefully attended to;
river and torrent courses were cleared of obstructions and straightened;
the superfluous water of the rainy season was stored, and meted out with
a wise economy to those who tilled the soil, in the spring and summer.
The prosperity of a country depends in part upon the laborious industry
of the inhabitants, in part upon their numbers. Chosroes regarded Persia
as insufficiently peopled, and made efforts to increase the population
by encouraging and indeed compelling marriage. All marriageable females
were required to provide themselves with husbands; if they neglected
this duty, the government interfered, and united them to unmarried men
of their own class. The pill was gilt to these latter by the advance of
a sufficient dowry from the public treasury, and by the prospect that,
if children resulted from the union, their education and establishment
in life would be undertaken by the state. Another method of increasing
the population, adopted by Chosroes to a certain extent, was the
settlement within his own territories of the captives whom he carried
off from foreign countries in the course of his military expeditions.
The most notorious instance of this policy was the Greek settlement,
known as Rumia (Rome), established by Chosroes after his capture of
Antioch (A.D. 540), in the near vicinity of Ctesiphon.
Oriental monarchs, in many respects civilized and enlightened, have
often shown a narrow and unworthy jealousy of foreigners. Chosroes had
a mind which soared above this petty prejudice. He encouraged the visits
of all foreigners, excepting only the barbarous Turks, readily received
them at his court, and carefully provided for their safety. Not only
were the roads and bridges kept in the most perfect order throughout his
territories, so as to facilitate locomotion, but on the frontiers and
along the chief lines of route guard-houses were built and garrisons
maintained for the express purpose of securing the safety of travellers.
The result was that the court of Chosroes was visited by numbers of
Europeans, who were hospitably treated, and invited, or even pressed, to
prolong their visits.
To the proofs of wisdom and enlightenment here enumerated Chosroes
added another, which is more surprising than any of them. He studied
philosophy, and was a patron of science and learning. Very early in his
reign he gave a refuge at his court to a body of seven Greek sages whom
a persecuting edict, issued by Justinian, had induced to quit their
country and take up their abode on Persian soil. Among the refugees was
the erudite Damascius, whose work De Principiis is well known, and has
recently been found to exhibit an intimate acquaintance with some of the
most obscure of the Oriental religions. Another of the exiles was the
eclectic philosopher Simplicius, “the most acute and judicious of the
interpreters of Aristotle.” Chosroes gave the band of philosophers a
hospitable reception, entertained them at his table, and was unwilling
that they should leave his court. They found him acquainted with
the writings of Aristotle and Plato, whose works he had caused to be
translated into the Persian tongue. If he was not able to enter
very deeply into the dialectical and metaphysical subtleties which
characterize alike the Platonic Dialogues and the Aristotelian
treatises, at any rate he was ready to discuss with them such questions
as the origin of the world, its destructibility or indestructibility,
and the derivation of all things from one First Cause or from more.
Later in his reign, another Greek, a sophist named Uranius, acquired his
especial favor, became his instructor in the learning of his country,
and was presented by him with a large sum of money. Further, Chosroes
maintained at his court, for the space of a year, the Greek physician,
Tribunus, and offered him any reward that he pleased at his departure.
He also instituted at Gondi-Sapor, in the vicinity of Susa, a sort
of medical school, which became by degrees a university, wherein
philosophy, rhetoric, and poetry were also studied. Nor was it Greek
learning alone which attracted his notice and his patronage. Under his
fostering care the history and jurisprudence of his native Persia
were made special objects of study; the laws and maxims of the first
Artaxerxes, the founder of the monarchy, were called forth from the
obscurity which had rested on them for ages, were republished and
declared to be authoritative; while at the same time the annals of the
monarchy were collected and arranged, and a “Shah-nameh,” or “Book of
the Kings,” composed, which it is probable formed the basis of the great
work of Firdausi. Even the distant land of Hindustan was explored in
the search after varied knowledge, and contributed to the learning and
civilization of the time the fables of Bidpai and the game of chess.
Though a fierce persecutor of the deluded followers of Mazdak, Chosroes
admitted and practised, to some extent, the principles of toleration.
On becoming king, he laid it down as a rule of his government that
the actions of men alone, and not their thoughts, were subject to his
authority. He was therefore bound not to persecute opinion; and we may
suppose that in his proceedings against the Mazdakites he intended to
punish their crimes rather than their tenets. Towards the Christians,
who abounded in his empire, he certainly showed himself, upon the whole,
mild and moderate. He married a Christian wife, and allowed her to
retain her religion. When one of his sons became a Christian, the only
punishment which he inflicted on him was to confine him to the palace.
He augumented the number of the Christians in his dominions by the
colonies which he brought in from abroad. He allowed to his Christian
subjects the free exercise of their religion, permitted them to build
churches, elect bishops, and conduct services at their pleasure, and
even suffered them to bury their dead, though such pollution of the
earth was accounted sacrilegious by the Zoroastrians. No unworthy
compliances with the established cult were required of them.
Proselytism, however, was not allowed; and all Christian sects were
perhaps not viewed with equal favor. Chosroes, at any rate, is accused
of persecuting the Catholics and the Monophysites, and compelling
them to join the Nestorians, who formed the predominant sect in his
dominions. Conformity, however, in things outward, is compatible with a
wide diversity of opinion; and Chosroes, while he disliked differences
of practice, seems certainly to have encouraged, at least in his earlier
years, a freedom of discussion in religious matters which must have
tended to shake the hereditary faith of his subjects. He also gave on
one occasion a very remarkable indication of liberal and tolerant views.
When he made his first peace with Rome, the article on which he insisted
the most was one whereby the free profession of their known opinions and
tenets in their own country was secured to the seven Grecian sages
who had found at his court, in their hour of need, a refuge from
persecution.
In his domestic relations Chosroes was unfortunate. With his chief wife,
indeed, the daughter of the great Khan of the Turks, he seems to have
lived always on excellent terms; and it was his love for her which
induced him to select the son whom she had borne him for his successor
on the throne. But the wife who stood next in his favor displeased him
by her persistent refusal to renounce the religion of Christ and adopt
that of her husband in its stead; and the quarrel between them must have
been aggravated by the conduct of their child, Nushizad, who, when he
came to years of discretion, deliberately preferred the faith of
his mother to that of his father and of the nation. With this choice
Chosroes was naturally offended; but he restrained his anger within
moderate limits, and was content to punish the young prince by
forbidding him to quit the precincts of the palace. Unhappy results
followed. Nushizad in his confinement heard a rumor that his father, who
had started for the Syrian war, was struck with sickness, was not likely
to recover, was dead. It seemed to him a golden opportunity, of which
he would be foolish not to make the most. He accordingly quitted his
prison, spread the report of his father’s death, seized the state
treasure, and scattered it with a liberal hand among the troops left in
the capital, summoned the Christians throughout the empire to his aid,
assumed the title and state of king, was acknowledged by the whole of
the southern province, and thought himself strong enough to take the
offensive and attempt the subjugation of Irak. Here, however, he was
met by Phabrizus (Firuz?), one of his father’s generals, who completely
defeated his army in a pitched battle. According to one account,
Nushizad fell in the thick of the fight, mortally wounded by a chance
arrow. According to another, he was made prisoner, and carried to
Chosroes, who, instead of punishing him with death, destroyed his hopes
of reigning by inflicting on him a cruel disfigurement.
The coins of Chosroes are very numerous, and offer one or two novel and
curious types. The most remarkable have on the obverse the head of the
king, presenting the full face, and surmounted by a mural crown with a
low cap. The beard is close, and the hair arranged in masses on either
side. There are two stars above the crown, and two crescents, one over
either shoulder, with a star and crescent on the dress in front of each
shoulder. The kings wears a necklace, from which hang three pendants. On
the reverse these coins have a full-length figure of the king, standing
to the front, with his two hands resting on the hilt of his straight
sword, and its point placed between his feet. The crown worn resembles
that on the obverse; and there is a star and crescent on either side of
the head. The legend on the obverse is _Khusludi afzum_, “May Chosroes
increase;” the reverse has, on the left _Khusludi_, with the
regnal year; on the right, a longer legend which has not yet been
satisfactorily interpreted. [PLATE XXII., Fig. 3.]
The more ordinary type on the coins of Chosroes I. is one differing but
little from those of his father, Kobad, and his son, Hormazd IV. The
obverse has the king’s head in profile, and the reverse the usual
fire-altar and supporters. The distinguishing mark of these coins is,
in addition to the legend, that they have three simple crescents in the
margin of the obverse, instead of three crescents with stars. [PLATE
XXII., Fig. 4.]
A relic of Chosroes has come down to us, which is of great beauty. This
is a cup composed of a number of small disks of colored glass, united
by a gold setting, and having at the bottom a crystal, engraved with a
figure of the monarch. As late as 1638 it was believed that the disks of
glass were jacynths, garnets, and emeralds, while the stone which forms
the base was thought to be a white sapphire. The original owner of so
rare a drinking-vessel could (it was supposed) only be Solomon; and the
figure at the bottom was accordingly supposed to represent the Jewish
king. Archaeologists are now agreed that the engraving on the gem, which
exactly resembles the figure upon the peculiar coins above described,
represents Chosroes Anushirwan, and is of his age. There is no
sufficient reason to doubt but that the cup itself is one out of which
he was accustomed to drink.
It is the great glory of Anushirwan that the title which his subjects
gave him was “the Just.” According to European, and especially to modern
ideas, this praise would seem to have undeserved; and thus the great
historian of the Byzantine period has not scrupled to declare that in
his external policy Chosroes was actuated by mere ambition, and that “in
his domestic administration he deserved the appellation of a tyrant.”
Undoubtedly the punishments which he inflicted were for the most part
severe; but they were not capricious, nor uniform, nor without reference
to the character of the offence. Plotting against his crown or
his person, when the conspirators were of full age, treasonable
correspondence with the enemy, violation of the sanctity of the harem,
and the proselytism which was strictly forbidden by the laws, he
punished with death. But, when the rebel was a mere youth, he was
content to inflict a disfigurement; whence the offence was less, he
could imprison, or confine to a particular spot, or simply banish
the culprit from his presence. Instances on record of his clemency to
offenders, and others which show that, when his own interests were at
stake, he steadily refused to make use of his unlimited power for
the oppression of individuals. It is unlikely that Anushirwan was
distinguished as “the Just” without a reason; and we may safely conclude
from his acknowledged title that his subjects found his rule more fair
and equitable than that of any previous monarch.
That the administration of Chosroes was wise, and that Persia prospered
under his government, is generally admitted. His vigilance, his
activity, his care for the poor, his efforts to prevent or check
oppression, are notorious, and cannot be gainsaid. Nor can it be doubted
that he was brave, hardy, temperate, prudent, and liberal. Whether
he possessed the softer virtues, compassion, kindliness, a tender and
loving heart, is perhaps open to question. He seems, however, to have
been a good husband and a good father, not easily offended, and not
over-severe whence offence was given him. His early severities against
his brothers and their followers may be regarded as caused by the advice
of others, and perhaps as justified by state policy. In his later life,
when he was his own master, he was content to chastise rebellion more
mildly.
Intellectually, there is no reason to believe that Chosroes rose very
high above the ordinary Oriental level. The Persians, and even many
Greeks, in his own day, exalted him above measure, as capable of
apprehending the most subtle arguments and the deepest problems of
philosophy; but the estimate of Agathias is probably more just, and this
reduces him to a standard about which there is nothing surprising. It
is to his credit that although engaged in almost perpetual wars, and
burdened moreover with the administration of a mighty empire, he had a
mind large enough to entertain the consideration also of intellectual
problems, and to enjoy and take part in their discussion; but it could
scarcely be expected that, with his numerous other employments, he
should really sound to their utmost depths the profundities of Greek
thought, or understand the speculative difficulties which separated
the various schools one from another. No doubt his knowledge was
superficial, and there may have been ostentation in the parade which
he made of it; but we must not deny him the praise of a quick, active
intellect, and a width of view rarely found in an Oriental.
It was not, however, in the field of speculative thought, but in that of
practical effort, that Chosroes chiefly distinguished himself and gained
his choicest laurels. The excellence of his domestic administration has
been already noticed. But, great as he was in peace, he was greater in
war. Engaged for nearly fifty years in almost uninterrupted contests,
he triumphed in every quarter, and scarcely experienced a reverse.
Victorious over the Romans, the Abyssinians, the Ephthalites, and the
Turks, he extended the limits of his empire on all sides, pacified
the discontented Armenia, crushed internal revolt, frustrated the most
threatening combinations, and established Persia in a position which
she had scarcely occupied since the days of Darius Hystaspis. Personally
engaged in above a score of fights, by the admission of his enemies he
was never defeated but once; and there are circumstances which make it
probable that this single check was of slight importance. The one real
failure that can be laid to his charge was in another quarter, and
involved no military, but only a political blunder. In recoiling from
the difficulties of the Lazic war, Chosroes had not to deplore
any disgrace to his arms, but simply to acknowledge that he had
misunderstood the temper of the Lazic people. In depreciation of his
military talents it may be said that he was never opposed to any great
general. With Belisarius it would certainly seem that he never actually
crossed swords; but Justinian and Maurice (afterwards emperor), to whom
he was opposed in his later years, were no contemptible antagonists. It
may further be remarked that the collapse of Persia in her struggle
with Rome as soon as Chosroes was in his grave is a tolerably decisive
indication that she owed her long career of victory under his guidance
to his possession of uncommon military ability.