CHAPTER V

Transcriber's Note:

Obvious printer errors have been corrected. Hyphenation has been

rationalised.

Small capitals have been replaced by full capitals. Italics are

indicated by _underscores_. Transliterated Greek is indicated by +plus

signs+.

The Corrigenda at the end include references to Volume I as well as to

this volume.

THE AGE OF JUSTINIAN AND

THEODORA

LONDON: GEORGE BELL AND SONS

PORTUGAL ST. LINCOLN'S INN, W.C.

CAMBRIDGE: DEIGHTON, BELL & CO.

NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN CO.

BOMBAY: A. H. WHEELER & CO.

THE AGE OF JUSTINIAN

AND THEODORA

A HISTORY OF THE SIXTH CENTURY A.D.

BY

WILLIAM GORDON HOLMES

VOL. II

_SECOND EDITION_

LONDON

G. BELL AND SONS, LTD.

1912

CHISWICK PRESS: CHARLES WHITTINGHAM AND CO.

TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON.

CONTENTS

CHAP. PAGE

V. THE PERSIANS AND JUSTINIAN'S FIRST

WAR WITH THEM 365

VI. THE SCHOOLS OF PHILOSOPHY AT ATHENS

AND THEIR ABOLITION BY JUSTINIAN 420

VII. THE INTERNAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE

EMPIRE: INSURRECTION OF THE CIRCUS

FACTIONS IN THE CAPITAL 440

VIII. CARTHAGE UNDER THE ROMANS: RECOVERY

OF AFRICA FROM THE VANDALS 489

IX. THE BUILDING OF ST. SOPHIA: THE

ARCHITECTURAL WORK OF JUSTINIAN 529

X. ROME IN THE SIXTH CENTURY: WAR WITH

THE GOTHS IN ITALY 544

XI. THE SECOND PERSIAN WAR: FALL OF

ANTIOCH: MILITARY OPERATIONS IN

LAZICA 584

XII. PRIVATE LIFE IN THE IMPERIAL CIRCLE

AND ITS DEPENDENCIES 605

XIII. THE FINAL CONQUEST OF ITALY AND ITS

ANNEXATION TO THE EMPIRE 624

XIV. RELIGION IN THE SIXTH CENTURY: JUSTINIAN

AS A THEOLOGIAN 668

XV. PECULIARITIES OF ROMAN LAW: THE

LEGISLATION OF JUSTINIAN 706

XVI. THE LAST DAYS OF JUSTINIAN: LITERATURE

AND ART IN THE SIXTH CENTURY:

SUMMARY AND REVIEW OF THE REIGN 726

INDEX 761

MAPS

SEAT OF JUSTINIAN'S WARS IN THE EAST 396

SEAT OF JUSTINIAN'S WARS IN THE WEST 572

THE AGE OF JUSTINIAN

AND THEODORA

CHAPTER V

THE PERSIANS AND JUSTINIAN'S FIRST WAR WITH THEM

On the death of Justin the absolute control of the Empire became centred

in the hands of Justinian. Nine years of virtual sovereignty during the

lifetime of his uncle had familiarized him with Imperial procedure, and

nullified the influence of a bureaucracy which might aspire to govern

vicariously by taking advantage of his ignorance of affairs. His tutors

in the art of autocracy were dead or superannuated, and his present

subordinates owed their elevation to his favour and judgment. The new

Emperor was a man of middle stature, spare rather than stout, and on the

verge of becoming bald and gray. His features were sufficiently regular,

his face was round, his complexion florid, and he wore neither beard nor

moustache.[1] Those whom he impressed unfavourably were fond of pointing

out that he bore a striking resemblance to Domitian.[2] He affected a

pleasant demeanour, appeared always with a set smile,[3] and was so

studious of personal popularity that even the meanest of his subjects

might hope for an audience of his sovereign. With an unbounded belief in

his own capacity for discrimination, he was always ready to listen, but

never to be convinced. His assurance communicated itself to those with

whom he came in contact, and his associates rarely ventured to dispute

his opinions.[4] His mode of life tended strongly towards asceticism,

and he yielded no indulgence to his natural appetites. In his diet he

restricted himself to the barest necessaries, he seemed to exist almost

without sleep, and there is no evidence that he was ever attracted

sexually by any woman except Theodora. Without commanding abilities, his

mental activity was incessant, and he was perpetually busy in every

department of the state.[5] He plunged into politics, law, and theology,

with the conviction that he could master every detail and deal

effectively with all questions which might arise for decision. Yet he

was credulous and lent a willing ear to those who brought in doubtful

reports, which he was generally prone to act upon without due inquiry as

to their authenticity.[6]

The Empress Theodora,[7] after her elevation, still presented in most

aspects of her life and character a marked contrast to Justinian. She

was devoted to the care of her person, and a great part of each day was

given over to the mysteries of her toilet.[8] She trusted especially to

sleep for the preservation of her beauty, and passed an excessive number

of hours, both day and night, upon her couch. Gratification of the

senses absorbed most of her time, and she indulged herself in the luxury

of a table always spread with the rarest delicacies. The air of the city

was uncongenial to her, and she resided during the greater part of the

year at the Heraion,[9] a palace over against the capital on the Asiatic

shore of the Bosphorus, where a second centre of Imperial state was

maintained for her benefit with lavish magnificence. But she was ever

vigilant in preserving the closest relationship with the machinery of

government, and in her retirement she meditated persistently on the

exigencies of the autocracy. Her numerous emissaries were to be observed

continually passing and repassing the strait which separated the Heraion

from Constantinople, regardless of tempestuous weather, and even of a

ferocious whale which had long infested the vicinity and made a practice

of attacking the small craft sailing in those waters, often with fatal

result to the occupants.[10] The personal relations of the royal

partners during the whole course of their joint reign, continued to be

of the most intimate description. Justinian not only deferred habitually

to the judgment of his consort, but took every opportunity of making a

public profession of his indebtedness to her co-operation. In Imperial

acts and edicts she appeared constantly as the "revered wife whom God

had granted to him as the participator of his counsels."[11] It may,

indeed, be assumed as certain that the resolution and verve to be found

in the character of Theodora supplied some real deficiencies in the

imperturbable and less acute nature of her husband;[12] and Justinian

was well inclined to justify his extraordinary marriage by insisting

that exceptional advantages accrued to the state from his choice of so

able a consort. Although the spectacle of a Roman empress electing to

lead the life of a prostitute was almost a familiar one in previous

history,[13] that an actual courtesan should be raised to the throne,

was a unique event in the annals of the empire. Nor was Theodora at all

exercised to veil her ascendancy in the affairs of government; on the

contrary, she scarcely refrained from proclaiming publicly that her will

was predominant in the work of the administration.[14] Her pretensions

were generally allowed, and those who sought preferment through Court

influence regularly crowded her ante-chamber, with the assurance that

success depended on winning her favourable regard. Unlike Justinian,

Theodora made herself difficult of access, and an assiduous attendance

for many days was an indispensable preliminary to obtaining an audience

of the Empress.[15] Doubtless but a small portion of each day could be

spared from the seclusion she imposed on herself for the nurture and

elaboration of her person. As both Emperor and Empress by an un-hoped

for chance had leaped to the Imperial seat from the obscurity of

plebeian life, they were proportionately jealous of their authority in

the lofty position to which they had attained without the qualifications

of rank or lineage. Hence they exacted the most servile respect from all

who approached them, and emphasized more than at any former time

humility of speech and abject prostration in the presence of the

sovereign. Any subject, without the exception of patricians or even of

foreign ambassadors, on arriving at the foot of the throne was compelled

to extend himself on the ground with his face to the floor and then to

kiss both feet of the monarch before he was privileged to deliver his

message or to make a request.[16] On such occasions the titles of

"emperor" and "empress," as expressing a merely official hegemony, were

considered to be insufficient, and it was expected that, by substituting

the terms "master" and "mistress," the subject should confess himself to

be the actual slave of his sovereign.[17] In previous reigns the forms

of adoration had been reserved for the Emperor, but Theodora ignored

such precedents and claimed for herself all the homage due to an

independent potentate. In one respect only did the conjugal harmony of

the Imperial couple appear to be seriously disturbed; while Justinian

was strictly orthodox in religion, Theodora gave an uncompromising

support to the Monophysites. The public, however, refused to believe in

the reality of this dissension, and attributed the seeming discord to an

astute policy which obliged the conflicting sects to give their united

support to the throne.[18]

The war with Persia, which had developed in a desultory fashion under

Justin, began to be waged with determination at the outset of

Justinian's reign. A thousand years before this date the Persian Empire,

founded by Cyrus the Achaemenian, had reached from the frontiers of

India to the shores of the Mediterranean, and had even held Egypt

precariously as an integral province. Diverse nationalities marched

under her standard, and immense hosts of Asiatics were habitually

mustered for the achievement of foreign conquest. But this monarchy

proved to be short-lived, and was destroyed in less than two centuries,

after the invasion of Greece by Darius and Xerxes had disclosed the fact

that a few thousands of patriotic Hellenes were of more martial worth

than the vast and heterogeneous armies led by the Persian king. Less

than ten years of actual warfare sufficed to bring the Achaemenian

Empire and its dependencies under the rule of Alexander; and the

indigenous races were kept in subjection by the Graeco-Macedonian

invaders for a longer period than the kindred dynasty established by

Cyrus had endured. The Persian Empire, in its widest extent, as it

existed under the Achaemenidae, was never restored; nor did any

subsequent conqueror issue from the west to repeat the exploits of

Alexander. The Asiatic successors of that monarch, the Seleucidae,[19]

were gradually ousted from their dominions by a wild race which attacked

them from the north, and became known historically as the Parthians.

Under their native rulers, the Arsacidae, they might have restored the

empire of Cyrus, but the simultaneous growth of the Latin power in Asia

Minor and Syria for ever confined the Parthians to the eastern bank of

the Euphrates. The policy of Rome, as defined by Augustus, forbade the

extension of the empire beyond the limits assigned to it after the

battle of Actium; but at least one emperor, the indomitable Trajan, was

ambitious of emulating the prowess of Alexander and designed to advance

on India. Although not uniformly victorious, he transformed the kingdom

of Armenia into a Roman province, and almost reduced Parthia to the

condition of a vassal state.[20] Death, or the more pressing claims of

home affairs, imposed a term to his activity in the field, and his great

schemes of conquest were never again entertained; but several later

emperors, notably Severus, Carus, and Galerius, often demonstrated the

superiority of the Roman forces under competent generalship over their

Oriental antagonists.[21] But after the Graeco-Roman supremacy had

declined to the stagnant mediocrity of Byzantinism this ascendancy could

no longer be maintained; and as often as East and West came into

collision the honours of war almost invariably rested with the Asiatic

power.

For more than five centuries after the overthrow of Darius by the armies

of Macedon the remnants of the Persian race languished in the Province

of Persis, a small state lying east of the Persian Gulf, to which was

allowed a semi-independence by the supreme government. Here was the

original home of Cyrus, and here he matured his plans for the conquest

of Media. From thence was derived the name of Persia, which was applied

by the western nations to the whole land of Iran, the native appellation

of the extensive plateau ranging from the Hindu Kush to the river

Tigris. In Persis was situated Persepolis, the traditional capital of

the Persians, where the sacred fires of the Zoroastrians was kept

perpetually alight in a temple by the Magi. In a drunken freak, or

perhaps as a signal to all Asia that he had succeeded to the sovreignty

of Iran, the ancient city had been committed to the flames by

Alexander;[22] but eventually a capital was reinstated on the old site,

and in later centuries became known as Istakhr.[23] About 200 A.D. a

reawakening of Persian aspirations became apparent, and a new Cyrus

arose at Istakhr to lead his nation to the reconquest of their former

empire. Ardeshír was the grandson of Sásán, who by a fortunate marriage

had united the pre-eminence of the priestly caste with that of the

princely house of Persis. Having gained possession of the local throne

by his superior energy, he began to exercise himself in active warfare

by attacking the neighbouring states, whose princes, like himself, were

the vassals of the Parthian king. At first his operations were

disregarded, and not until he had made himself the lord of a

considerable territory was he summoned by his suzerain to explain his

encroachments. His reply was a defiance and a challenge to battle. In

the war which ensued Artabanus was overthrown by Ardeshír, and the

Parthian dynasty of the Arsacidae was replaced by that of the Sassanidae

(_c._ 227). The Persian now assumed the title of _Shahinshah_, that is

"King of Kings," which had usually been affected by the potentates of

all Iran, and established himself at the Parthian capital of Ctesiphon

on the Tigris, a position more suitable for the seat of government than

the remote Persepolis. The empire thus regenerated by the Sassanians,

held its own among the surrounding powers for four hundred years, until

the general irruption over Asia of the fanatical hosts of Islam.[24]

The dominions of Ardeshír and his successors covered an area almost

equal to that of the Eastern Empire, but were probably much less

populous. The table-land of Iran is far from being so well adapted for

the sustentation of animal and vegetable life as the countries

amalgamated into a single state by the Roman arms. More than a fourth of

the surface is occupied by desert and salt swamps;[25] while the greater

portion of the remainder is broken up by immense mountain ranges, some

of which rise to a height of 18,000 feet. The prevailing population of

this region within the historic period has always been a division of the

Aryan race, of the great Indo-Germanic family of mankind, who at some

early epoch spread themselves across two continents, from the frontiers

of Burmah to the Atlantic seaboard of Europe. Originally the possessors

of a common language, the elements of their speech are to be found in

the Sanskrit, once colloquial throughout the valley of the Ganges, and

in the Erse of the Irish peasant, who inhabits the wilds of Connemara.

Although the face of the country has been scarred by the march of

numerous invaders, and even by religious revolution, the sociological

condition of these Eastern lands has scarcely changed at all during the

millenniums of recorded history; and the Persian citizen or rustic of

to-day is almost a counterpart of those who looked out on the progresses

of Darius and Xerxes.[26] The primitive Iranians were an agricultural

people, and as such showed an attachment to the cattle which composed

their farm stock almost amounting to veneration. But the tiller of the

soil in Iran was often exposed to harsh conditions in the effort to draw

his livelihood from the ground. The land was not uniformly fertile,

climatic severity not seldom hampered the labourer, and predatory bands

of nomads, who raided the country from the north, were a frequent cause

of disaster.[27] Life was a series of vicissitudes, circumstances of

time and place were in general sharply contrasted, and the normal

activities of nature seemed to the peaceful native to be the outcome of

perpetual strife between spirits of good and evil. In Bactria, the

north-eastern tract of Iran, all these conditions were most typically

presented. About 1000 B.C. that region was ruled by King Vistaspa,[28]

under whom flourished the prophet Zarathushtra, the original redactor of

the religion and ethical system accepted by the Persians. He gave a

distinct expression to the philosophical tendencies of his age, and

refined the loose polytheistic conceptions at first held by the Aryans

to the complete dualism in which Ahura-Mazda, the Lord of Wisdom, and

Angra-Mainyu, the Devisor of Evil, became the essential factors of a

definite theological faith.[29] On this foundation an Avesta or Bible of

Mazdeism was elaborated, which laid down the law for the whole conduct

of human life.[30] Among the primitive deities most reverence had been

paid to Mithra, the sun-god, to Spenta Aramaiti, the earth spirit, and

to Anahita, the goddess of the waters.[31] As subordinates of

Ahura-Mazda, these divinities still held an established place, and were

made the immediate objects of the rites and ceremonies imposed on the

pious Iranian. Hence the sanctity of fire, earth, and water became an

article of faith, and it was believed to be a heinous crime to

contaminate them with any impurity. Whatever was evil was esteemed to be

impure, and, therefore, the work of Angra-Mainyu. The Druj Nasu, a

female demon, personifying the lie, was regarded as his universal agent,

and as being present imminently under all adverse circumstances. Such

were the principles of Mazdeism, the rigid application of which, and

they were rigidly applied by the Magi, was productive of many curious

sociological phenomena strangely at variance with the customs of other

nations.[32] Death was considered to be the greatest of calamities, and

hence a corpse became possessed of the Druj, and the most active of all

sources of contamination. That so foul an object should be placed in

intimate contact with the holy elements of fire, earth, or water, was

sacrilege in the highest degree. Cremation and burial were, therefore,

held in abhorrence, and a deceased person had to be borne to some

isolated spot, far from fire and water, there to be exposed on an

elevated bier with the intention that the flesh should be devoured by

wild dogs, birds, etc.[33] Disease was, of course, a grade of demoniacal

obsession, so that sympathy for the sick was almost alienated by

superstition. If an ordinary soldier were taken ill on the march he was

abandoned by the wayside, some provisions being left with him, and also

a stick, with which to beat off any carnivorous animals. Should he

recover, on his reappearance all fled from him as from an apparition

risen out of the infernal regions; nor could he resume intercourse with

his relations until he had undergone a rigorous purification by the

Magi.[34] Owing to the holiness of water great reverence was felt for

rivers, which were protected by law from all defilement; and no good

Zoroastrian would travel by ship lest he should pollute the sea with his

normal excrement.[35] For purposes of cleansing water was used very

charily, and it was sinful to take a bath.[36] The vegetable productions

of the earth were viewed with profound admiration, wherefore the

cultivation of gardens and parks was among the greatest delights of the

Persians.[37] The estimation in which cattle were held was the cause of

some singular legislation and ritual enactments. Thus the urine of the

cow was habitually collected and made use of daily for the purification

of the body by washing.[38] The sheep-dog was an object of extreme

solicitude, so much so that the penalty exacted for manslaughter was

only half as onerous as that inflicted for the crime of giving bad food

to such a precious animal,[39] but even the latter was a mild offence

compared with the infamy of killing a water-dog, the name by which the

otter was identified, as the wretch convicted was sentenced to be beaten

to death.[40] On the other hand, noxious animals were regarded as the

creation of Angra-Mainyu, and the Magi made it a religious duty to kill

them with their own hands, especially ants, serpents, reptiles in

general, and certain birds.[41] In some cases it was permitted to the

subject to take the law into his own hands and to slay the guilty person

on the spot. Such culprits were the highwayman, the sodomite, the

prostitute, and anyone caught in the act of burning a corpse.[42] On the

whole, however, capital punishment was infrequent, and almost any

trespass, even murder, could be atoned for by making a money payment to

the Magi.[43]

In the sociology of Mazdeism the strangest phenomenon that developed

itself was the tenet that affinity by blood was the highest requisite in

a marriage contract. This principle was inculcated by the priests to an

extreme degree, so that the closer the relationship the more acceptable

was the union affirmed to be in the eyes of the Deity. Not only could

brother and sister marry under religious sanction, but even father and

daughter;[44] and, most repugnant of all to the common inclinations of

humanity, the nuptials of mother and son were expressly enjoined as a

righteous act by the Avesta. This anomalous association of the sexes was

justified partly by the false analogy of certain physiological facts

supplied by the animal kingdom, and partly by an appeal to precedents to

be found in the Iranian mythology. Hybrids were notoriously infertile,

and the congress of horses with asses engendered mules who were impotent

to propagate their kind. Hence the mingling of family blood was

indicated as essential to preserving the integrity of the race. Further,

it was pointed out that the primaeval man, Gaya Maretan, impregnated

Spenta Aramaiti; that is, his mother earth, the result of this

conjunction being a son and a daughter. By this union the brother and

sister became the progenitors of the whole human race. At least one

Parthian, and probably several of the Achaemenian and Sassanian kings,

may be noted as having chosen their own mother for their consort on the

throne.[45] Such marriages were not merely ceremonial, although in some

instances the chief inducement may have been to insure the support of

the Magi for a disputed succession.[46] Incestuous offspring were not

unknown, and the case of Sisimithres, a provincial potentate subdued by

Alexander, is specially mentioned as that of one whose mother-wife had

borne him two sons.[47] Rich Persians indulged themselves with several

wives, besides maintaining numerous concubines, but, as monogamy only

was contemplated by the Avesta, the senior wife was the undisputed

mistress of the household.[48]

The Parthians found it politic to assimilate their supremacy to that of

the Greeks whom they had displaced; and thus to attract to themselves

the influence which had so recently been predominant throughout Iran.

They, therefore, distinguished themselves by the epithet of

"Philhellen," and continued to impress their coins in Greek characters

with that affix, even after the Romans had become most potent in the

East. By degrees, however, the memory of the Greek dominion faded, and

before the middle of the second Christian century orientalism was

completely re-established. Legends in the Pahlavi, or Parthian language,

were adopted for the superscription of the currency, upon which the

Hellenized Serapis now yielded his place to Mithras or the Mazdean

fire-altar.[49] As a scion of the house of Sásán, Ardeshír was naturally

much swayed by priestly influence, and relied on the support of the Magi

as the chief element of his power. By his edicts and inscriptions he

proclaimed himself to be a Mazdayasn, or devout servant of Ahura-Mazda,

and the dynasty he founded was always noted for its firm adherence to

the national religion.[50] On his accession Ardeshír undertook the

restoration of the Avesta, a great part of which had been neglected or

altogether lost, and under the supervision of the Magi he caused a

purification or reformation of the faith of Zarathushtra to be

begun.[51] This work was continued by his successors, but, as no canon

of scripture had been formed, there were many conflicting sects, and not

until the reign of Sapor II[52] (_c._ 330) was the text of the sacred

book fixed beyond dispute. Then Adarbâd, a holy man, produced his

recension of the Avesta among the assembled Magi, and offered to submit

himself to the ordeal of fire in proof of its strict orthodoxy. Molten

brass was poured upon his breast, he passed the test unscathed, and his

reading of the tenets of Mazdeism was never afterwards contested.[53]

Ardeshír did not, however, base his message of fortune solely on an

appeal to the mystical emotions of his nation; but he also sought to

attach them to himself by stimulating their patriotism. He professed

that he would avenge the murder of Darius on the inheritors of

Alexander, and asserted himself to be the rightful ruler of all western

Asia, which had been unlawfully wrested from his ancestors. Thus the

Persian empire, as restored by the Sassanians, was inspired with

sentiments which urged it to maintain an inveterate conflict with

Rome.[54]

Although there is evidence of constant religious commotion in Persia

under the Sassanidae, it does not appear that any considerable number of

the historical adherents of Zarathushtra ever swerved from their faith.

The numerous priestly tribe of the Magi not only surrounded the throne,

but were fully disseminated throughout the provinces as the guardians of

Mazdeism. The valley of the Euphrates and Tigris, however, the most

densely populated district of the empire, was the site of a very

heterogeneous ethnology, with archaeological records which extend

backwards for some thousands of years prior to the descent of the Arians

into Iran. There had existed the kingdoms of Sumer and Akkad, having an

ancient mythology of their own, which was liable to be diversified by

the infiltration of Semitic elements from the south-west.[55] In this

region Mani flourished and was enabled to spread his doctrines, but as

soon as he threatened to pervert the loyal Zoroastrians his downfall was

brought about by the resentment of the Magi.[56] Here also Christianity

essayed to penetrate into Persia, but with the same result, and we

possess some details of the cruel persecution to which Christians were

subjected whenever they came into collision with the established

religion of the state.[57] In some instances, however, Roman heretics,

such as the Nestorians who fled before the face of an orthodox Emperor,

were accorded an asylum in Persia by a politic Shah.[58]

Towards the end of the fifth century a serious ferment in the ranks of

the Zoroastrians themselves was occasioned by the preaching of a

fanatical demagogue named Mazdak. This reformer aimed at nothing less

than a subversion of the existing sociological status by the induction

of a communistic partage of women and property. All practical class

distinctions were thus to be swept away, so that a level affluence

should prevail throughout the land. It appears that in the early years

of his reign Cavades found himself greatly hampered by the arrogant

pretensions of his nobles, wherefore he lent a favourable ear to the new

propaganda, and gave public encouragement to Mazdak. But the power of

the throne was unequal for the achievement of such a revolution; the

Magi and the nobles met in council, deposed Cavades, and, with some

hesitation conceding to him his life, caused him to be imprisoned in a

stronghold called the Castle of Oblivion. From this durance he was

shortly released through the devotion of a handsome sister-wife, who

seduced the fidelity of the gaoler by the promise of her person. Being

allowed to sleep for one night in her brother's apartment, she had him

carried out next morning enrolled in her bed-furniture, for the

exemption of which from inspection she invented a plausible excuse.[59]

Cavades now made good his escape to Bactria, where he spent a couple of

years as a guest of the King of the Hephthalites. Ultimately he obtained

the loan of an army from that monarch,[60] with which he drove his

brother Jamâsp, who had been created king in the meantime, from the

throne. As for Mazdak, it seems that for the next quarter of a century

he was allowed a free hand to propagate his opinions, an attitude of

neutrality being adopted by the Shah and the Magi. His gospel was

accepted by an increasing number of the Iranians, whom he persuaded that

his communism was the only mode of life which accorded with the precepts

of Zarathushtra. At length the growing transformation of the social

system began to be viewed with alarm; a generation of children had

sprung up who were ignorant of their parentage, and in all directions

the ownership of property was falling into abeyance.[61] It was

resolved, therefore, by the Shah and priests in council that the

Mazdakites should be extirpated by the sweeping Oriental device of a

general massacre. In order to achieve this object an assemblage of all

the members of the sect was convened by Chosroes, the designated heir to

the crown, who had ingratiated himself with Mazdak and his disciples

under the pretence of being a convert to their doctrines. It was

represented that Cavades on a certain day would abdicate in favour of

his son, who would at once reinstate the throne on the principle that

for the future the Mazdakites should be its chief supporters. The ruse

succeeded; Cavades received the leaders in state surrounded by the Magi,

asserted his imminent retirement, and desired them to muster their whole

following in a place apart. There Chosroes would join them and institute

the new _régime_ with due formality. They obeyed, and were immediately

surrounded by a division of the army, who cut them to pieces. The

remnants of the sect throughout the provinces were afterwards hunted

down, and got rid of by burning at the stake.[62]

The moment we turn our attention to the Persian court, and begin to

observe the material and ceremonial attributes of the monarch, we

discover the prototype of almost the whole fabric of Byzantine state as

displayed at Constantinople. In the East was found the model of those

accretions which gradually transformed the unassuming Roman Emperor of

the Tiber into the haughty autocrat who overawed his subjects with

pageantry on the Bosphorus; but the native sobriety of Europe always

stopped short of the pronounced extravagance and hyperbole of

Orientalism. The throne of the Sassanians stood between four pillars

which upheld a ciborium.[63] On sitting down, the Shahinshah inserted

his head into the crown, a mass of precious metal and jewels suspended

by a chain, too ponderous to be worn without extraneous support.[64] No

epithet was too lofty for the Persian monarch to assume in his epistles;

he was brother of the sun and moon, a god among men, and in merely

mundane affairs the King of kings, the lord of all nations, as well as

everything else expressive of unlimited power and success.[65] When he

made a progress out of doors the streets were cleansed and decorated in

the manner already described as customary during the passage of the

Eastern Emperor.[66] Personal reverence was, of course, carried to the

extreme point, and even officials of the highest rank kissed the ground

before venturing to address the Shah.[67] The succession to the throne

was strictly hereditary and, although several revolutions occurred

during the four centuries of the Sassanian rule, in every instance the

crown devolved to a prince of the blood of Ardeshír.[68]

A Persian army of this date was very similar to a Roman one, but there

were some essential differences. With the exception of the Royal guards,

which, like those of the Achaemenians, included a body of ten thousand,

called "the Immortals,"[69] and necessary garrisons, a standing army was

not maintained.[70] On each occasion, therefore, the fighting force had

to be levied afresh whenever a campaign was in prospect, but, as a

traditional part of Persian education was that every youth should be

taught to ride and to become an efficient archer,[71] the new recruits

were not necessarily deficient in military training. During a battle, in

fact, they relied chiefly on their missiles, and a Persian horseman was

provided with two bows and thirty arrows.[72] Less importance was

attached to the infantry, but they also consisted of bands of archers.

The cavalry were generally almost as numerous, and in addition a troop

of elephants was often a prominent feature in a Persian army.[73]

The revenue of Persia previous to the sixth century was mainly derived

from agricultural industry; and every inhabitant who cultivated the

ground handed over to the state collectors a tithe of whatever

economical growth his land produced. Cavades, however, from personal

observation became impressed with the disadvantages of this system,

which often seriously hampered his subjects in providing for their daily

wants, and deprived them of the full benefit of the newly ripened

crops.[74] Thus the rustic population feared to be accused of

falsification if they ventured to supply their present needs before the

arrival of an official whose duty it was to inspect the produce of the

soil and of the fruit-bearing trees while still in position, and to

deliver to them their note of assessment. Cavades, therefore, decided on

the abolition of tithes in favour of a land-tax, a sweeping reform,

beset with many difficulties, which engaged his attention for many

years, and was only fully established by his successor.[75] With the

inhabitants of towns and villages, who did not subsist by agriculture,

the Persians adopted the usual expedient, in this age, of imposing a

poll-tax.[76]

The Sassanian Empire did not distinguish itself in the realm of art; and

the scanty remains which have been discovered indicate that their

architectural productions owed much to Byzantine co-operation.[77] As

temple worship was a minor feature of the Zoroastrian religion, which

consisted almost wholly in forms of private devotion,[78] no ruins

pertaining to buildings of that class have been found;[79] but in

several places portions of dilapidated palaces exist, which enable us to

estimate accurately the artistic proficiency of the Sassanians.[80] The

residence of the Shahinshah was a quadrangular edifice built around a

central court. Externally the walls were diversified by two or three

superimposed rows of slender columns, those rising from the ground being

much taller than the upper ranges. The distinctive part of the

architectural design was an arched entrance, wide and lofty, which led

into a great domical hall, from whence small doors gave access to the

various chambers of the palace. All the apartments, at least those of

any size, were covered with a domed roof. To the rather tasteless

exterior decoration of these palaces the remains of an unfinished one

discovered at Mashita, on the edge of the Syrian desert,[81] offers a

striking exception. For several feet from the foundations the walls are

covered with an intricate tracing of carving, in which lions, tigers,

and doves, appear entangled amid the leaves and contorted branches of

some luxuriant vegetation.[82] A considerable number of bas-reliefs have

come to light among the ruins of Sassanian palaces, some of them

illustrating the achievements of the dynasty during its wars with Rome

and various powers, others representing hunting scenes in which are

shown the methods of the chase and the magnificence of the monarch on

such occasions amid his attendant throng of courtiers and guards. The

execution of these works cannot be spoken of as art in the Hellenic

sense, but in chiselling the forms of animal life some approach to

excellence may sometimes be noted, especially in the case of

elephants.[83] As for literature, it appears that the Sassanians

produced little or nothing national, with the exception of priestly

elaboration of the Mazdean scriptures, but in the last days of the

empire, a crude history under the title of _Shahnameh_, that is, a Book

of Kings, was compiled.[84]

The first important commission entrusted to Belisarius by Justinian,

after his accession to undivided power, was the construction of a fort

at Mindo, a village on the Roman frontier between Dara and Nisibis.[85]

As soon as the news of this bold measure was announced to Cavades he

determined to prevent the execution of the work by every means in his

power. He had already despatched a considerable army under two of his

sons through Persarmenia in order to make an incursion into Lazica. This

force he now diverted from its original purpose, and directed them to

march with all speed to the scene of the offensive operations.[86]

Information of the impending attack was immediately transmitted to the

Emperor. He promptly resolved to frustrate it by a counter-move of a

similar kind. The troops posted in the province of Libanus under the

brothers Cutzes and Butzes, two young Thracians, were therefore ordered

to hasten northwards to strengthen the hands of Belisarius. Their

arrival was well-timed, and the Persians found themselves intercepted

before they could make an onslaught against the works. The Orientals

halted and proceeded to encamp themselves methodically over against the

Romans. They then took the precaution to cover their line secretly with

a series of pits, at the bottom of which they fixed stakes, and

afterwards restored the surface so as to give the appearance of unbroken

ground.[87] The young Thracians, rash and inexperienced, neglected to

observe the precise movements of the enemy, nor did they delay to take

counsel with Belisarius, but pushed forwards impetuously to join battle

with their opponents as soon as they were able to dispose their forces

in order for an attack. The Persians calmly awaited the assault until

the Byzantines had entered on the treacherous ground, and became

disorganized by falling into the numerous traps which had been prepared

for them. An indiscriminate slaughter then ensued, most of the officers

being killed, but some of them were taken prisoners, among the latter

being Cutzes. No effort could now avail to save the fort, which was at

once abandoned by Belisarius, who, with the wreck of the army, made good

his retreat to Dara.

[Illustration: Seat of

JUSTINIAN'S WARS

in the East]

After this disaster Justinian promoted Belisarius to the rank of Master

of the Forces in the East, and authorized him to levy an army of the

greatest possible strength. In this task he joined with him Hermogenes,

Master of the Offices, whom, with Rufinus, a patrician, he despatched to

the theatre of war. The latter was well known as a legate at the Persian

court, and he was directed to take advantage of the customary suspension

of hostilities during the winter, which was now at hand, to make

overtures to Cavades for the conclusion of a peace. An interchange of

propositions on the subject was kept up for some months, during which

the Shah maintained an equivocal attitude, until, on the approach of

spring, scouts brought in the intelligence that the Persians were

advancing with a great army, evidently counting on the capture of Dara.

In a short time a taunting message was brought to Belisarius from

Perozes, who was in chief command, charging him to prepare a bath in the

town against his arrival on the following evening.[88] This Perozes was

one of the elder sons of Cavades,[89] and his insolent confidence was

inspired by the success of the recent action, in which he had borne the

principal part. His notice was taken as a serious warning, and the Roman

generals at once set about disposing their forces in order of battle,

anticipating a decisive engagement on the following day. Their army

consisted of about 25,000 men, most of whom were mounted, and they were

drawn up within a stone's throw of the wall of Dara. Belisarius and

Hermogenes, surrounded by their personal guards, posted themselves in

the rear, next to the town. Immediately in front of them was ranged the

main body of their troops, in a long line, made up of alternating squads

of horse and foot. A little in advance of these, at each end, was

stationed a battalion of six hundred Huns.[90] Such was the centre to

which, but at some distance forward, wings were supplied, each one

composed of about three thousand cavalry. A trench, interrupted at

intervals for passage and dipping in to meet the centre, covered the

whole of this formation in front, but excluding the two bodies of

Hunnish horse standing at each reentrant angle.[91] Lastly, advantage

was taken of a small hill lying on the extreme left to form an ambush of

three hundred Herules under their native leader, Pharas.

As soon as the Persian host had established itself on the field, they

were perceived to be much more numerous than the Romans, amounting to

quite forty thousand men. The Mirrhanes, such was the military title

borne by Perozes, drew up his forces in two lines with the design that

when those in front were exhausted they should be replaced by fresh

troops from behind, the movement to become alternating, if necessary,

with intervening periods of rest for each line. The wings were composed

of cavalry, the famous band of Immortals being stationed on the left,

whilst Perozes himself led the van, supported by the heaviest mass of

combatants. On the first day that the armies stood facing each other the

Persians' left wing suddenly improvised a skirmish with those opposed to

them, but retired after a brief collision with the loss of seven of

their number. Later on a Persian youth of great prowess rode into the

interspace and defied any Roman to meet him in single combat. No soldier

seemed inclined to respond, but at length one Andrew, the tent-keeper of

Buzes, lately a trainer of athletes at Constantinople, took up the

challenge. The adversaries charged each other with poised lances, the

Persian was unhorsed, and Andrew, quickly dismounting, cut his throat

with a knife. The Romans shouted with delight, whilst the Persians,

chagrined, determined to retrieve the mischance, and soon presented

another champion. A horseman, middle-aged, but of great weight, advanced

cracking his whip and calling out for some confident opponent. Still no

response from the military on the Roman side. At last Andrew, despite

the express prohibition of Hermogenes, advanced again and braced himself

for the encounter. The pair charged, their lances glanced aside, but the

horses crashed against each other breast to breast, and both animals

rolled over on the turf. The riders essayed to rise, but the athlete

anticipated his heavy opponent and despatched him before he could regain

his feet. It was now almost nightfall, and both armies withdrew from

their positions, the Persians to their encampment, the Romans within the

walls of Dara.

Next day the troops were drawn out on both sides in the same order, but

the Roman generals, relying on the peace proposals, which they

considered to be still in progress, deemed it possible that a conflict

might be avoided. They addressed a letter, therefore, to the Mirrhanes,

representing the uselessness of further bloodshed at a time when their

respective sovereigns were bent on the resumption of amicable relations.

In his answer Perozes accused his adversaries of ill faith, and declared

his disbelief in the genuineness of their overtures on behalf of peace.

To this Belisarius replied that Rufinus would shortly be at hand with

letters which would convict the Persians of a wanton rupture of their

engagements, and that they should be fixed to the top of his standard at

the outset of the battle. The rejoinder of the Mirrhanes closed the

parley; he expressed unbounded confidence, and reiterated his mocking

request that a bath and a suitable repast should be prepared for him

forthwith within the city. His assurance was, in fact, increased at the

moment, for, that very morning, a reinforcement of ten thousand men had

joined him from Nisibis.[92]

As a prelude to the battle the opposing leaders mutually harangued their

men. "The recent encounter," said the Byzantine generals, "has taught

you that the Persians are not invincible. You are better soldiers than

they, and it is easy to see that on former occasions you suffered

because you disobeyed your officers. The enemy knew it, and came on here

trusting to profit by your want of discipline, but since their arrival

they have been awed by your firm array. You see before you an immense

host, but the infantry are contemptible, wretched rustics, and mere

camp-followers, fit only to dig beneath the walls or to strip the slain.

They carry no arms to assault you with, and merely cover themselves with

great shields to avoid our darts. Bear yourselves bravely, and the

Persians will never again dare to invade our country." On the other

side, Perozes bade his troops to take no heed of the skilful tactics now

first observable among the Romans. "You think," said he, "that your

adversaries have become more warlike because of this imposing formation.

On the contrary, the ditch they have covered their positions with proves

their increased timidity; nor have they, though thus protected, ventured

to attack us. But never doubt that they will fall into their accustomed

confusion the moment we assault them; and remember that your conduct

will hereafter be judged of by the Shahinshah."

Shortly after midday[93] the action was begun by the Persian archers,

and, until the quivers were exhausted, showers of arrows were discharged

from each side so thick as to darken the sky. The rain of missiles from

the Orientals was heaviest, but an adverse wind rendered it less

effective, so that the Byzantines suffered no more than they inflicted.

On its cessation several thousands of the Persians bore down on the left

wing of the Romans and threw it into disorder. Already the flight had

commenced, when the six hundred Huns held in reserve on that side

charged the left flank of the enemy; and simultaneously the three

hundred Herules, rushing down the slope of the hill from their ambush,

fell upon them behind. Terrified by these unforeseen attacks the

Persians turned and fled indiscriminately, whereupon the Romans joined

in a triple band to take the offensive, and inflicted on them a loss of

fully three thousand before they could reach their own lines.

Considering it unwise, however, to proceed too far, the Romans soon

desisted from the pursuit, and retired to their original positions.

A moment later the Persian left wing, including the whole regiment of

Immortals, made a fierce descent on those opposite them, and succeeded

in beating them back to the wall of Dara. At the sight of this defeat,

however, the Byzantine generals ordered the Hunnish reserve just

returned from pursuit to join their fellows of the right wing, and

launched the whole twelve hundred, together with their personal guards,

against the enemy's flank. As a result that wing of the Persians was cut

in two, the after portion being arrested in its charge, and among these

happened to be the standard-bearer, who was slain on the spot. Alarmed

at the collapse of the ensign, those who were fighting in advance, being

the majority, now turned to attack the mass of troops who had gained

possession of the ground in their rear. The discomfited right wing of

the Byzantines, thus freed from danger, immediately rallied and dashed

forward after their lately victorious adversaries. Simultaneously the

general of the Persian wing in action fell before the lance of one of

the leaders of the Roman reserves and disappeared from his saddle. A

panic then seized on the Orientals, and they thought of nothing but

escape by flight. From all sides the Romans rushed to make an onslaught

on them, they became hemmed in by a circle of steel, and were

slaughtered without resistance to the number of five thousand. A general

rout of the Persian army ensued; the infantry, on seeing the destruction

of the cavalry, threw away their shields and fled, but they were quickly

overtaken, so that a great majority of them perished. Belisarius and his

colleague, however, fearing lest the reaction of despair in so great a

host might lead to some disaster, recalled their forces as soon as they

judged the defeat of the enemy to be complete. Such was the victory of

Dara, the achievement of which appears to have been due mainly to the

military talents of Belisarius, whose age at this date (530) was

probably under thirty.[94] For the rest of this war the Persians always

avoided fighting a pitched battle with the Romans.[95]

During the succeeding summer desultory hostilities were carried on in

Armenia, where, as a rule, the Byzantines had the advantage; and two

fortified posts of some importance, Bolum and Pharangium,[96] in the

Persian division of that country, fell into their hands. At the same

time three Persarmenians, who held commands in the Persian service,

deserted and fled to Constantinople. There they were received and

provided for by a fellow-countryman of their own, the eunuch Narses, who

at the moment filled the office of Count of the Privy Purse, the same

who afterwards attained to great military celebrity.[97] This part of

the war was conducted by Sittas, who had become the husband of Comito,

the sister of Theodora.[98] He also had been promoted to the rank of a

Master of Soldiers.

In the meantime Justinian was still desirous of concluding a peace, and

towards the close of 530 his ambassador, Rufinus, succeeded in gaining

an audience of Cavades. In reply to a general appeal the Persian monarch

complained bitterly that the whole responsibility of guarding the

Caspian Gates had been thrown on his shoulders, and that the fortress of

Dara was maintained as a constant threat against his frontier. He also

adverted to the fact that Persia was a poor country, and accused the

Romans of penuriousness in money matters. "Either," said he, "let Dara

be dismantled, or pay an equitable sum towards the upkeep of the Caspian

Gates."[99] He showed no inclination, however, to agree to any specific

terms, and dismissed the Roman emissaries in the evident expectation

that some decisive success would enable him to dictate the articles of a

treaty. He was encouraged by the fact that he was entertaining at the

time several thousand refugees of the Samaritan sect, who had been

driven from their homes in Palestine by religious persecution. Such

internal disorders must lessen the offensive powers of his rival, whilst

the expatriated sectarians were even anxious to bear arms against their

late oppressor.[100]

In the beginning of spring (531) it became manifest that the Persians

had been maturing a plan of campaign based on a strategical diversion,

by which they hoped to surprise the enemy and possess themselves of a

rich booty before their operations could be arrested. The originator of

the scheme was Alamundar, his Saracenic ally, who pointed out to Cavades

that if a descent were made on Euphratesia, the overlying province of

Syria, they might advance to the walls of Antioch through a populous

district teeming with wealthy towns but slightly guarded, and totally

unapprehensive of their security being threatened. "Antioch itself,"

said he, "the richest city of the East, is always given over to public

festivities and theatrical rivalries, and is divested of a garrison.

Well might we capture it and make good our retreat to Persia without

meeting with a hostile force. In Mesopotamia, to which the war has been

confined hitherto, the enemy is prepared for us, and we can inflict no

damage on them without engaging in a perpetual series of battles." His

advice was acted upon, and a Persian general, Azarathes, invaded

Euphratesia with fifteen thousand horse, supported by a numerous body of

Saracenic auxiliaries. The news of their entry on Roman territory was

speedily conveyed to Belisarius at Dara, and he resolved to proceed at

once by forced marches to meet the raiders. His army consisted of about

twenty thousand men, including cavalry and infantry, and he moved with

such rapidity that he succeeded in bringing the enemy to a stand

at Gabbulae, before they had had time to commit any serious

depredations.[101] Azarathes and Alamundar were taken aback at this

encounter, which falsified all their calculations. They were devoid of

confidence in their power to resist a Roman force, especially when led

by a general who had so lately proved his superiority; and they,

therefore, decided to abandon the expedition and to retrace their steps

with all haste to their own country. Belisarius, on his side, was well

satisfied when he perceived that his adversaries were anxious only to

beat a retreat, and he determined to leave them unmolested, but to

follow their movements until he saw them safely over the border of the

province. The two armies were separated from each other by about a day's

march, and they proceeded for several days in an easterly direction

along the bank of the Euphrates, which lay to the left of their route.

Each evening the Byzantines spread their tents on the same camping

ground which had been occupied by the Orientals during the previous

night. They began to cross the northern extremity of the Syrian

desert.[102] In the meantime, however, the Roman troops had become

inflamed with the desire to attack an enemy whom they saw constantly

flying before them; and at length they broke into open murmurs against

their general who, from sloth and timidity, they exclaimed, was

restraining them from a glorious success. Belisarius strove to repress

their ardour by urging that no fruitful victory was possible under the

conditions present, whereas the enemy, if driven to desperation, might

inflict a defeat which would restore to them their liberty of action,

and be attended with disastrous consequences to the surrounding country.

He also represented to his men that their strength was sapped by

incessant marching, and especially by the fasts imposed on them by the

season of Lent, through which they were passing; finally, that a portion

of the army had not yet arrived. At last he was overborne by their

clamours, in which many of his officers joined, and even expressed his

confidence that a general could not fail to conquer when in command of

troops so eager to be led into action.[103]

On Easter Eve the Romans overtook the Persians, and the two armies

encamped in sight of each other at a short distance from the town of

Callinicus on the Euphrates. The day was observed as a strict fast, but

nevertheless on the Sunday morning Belisarius drew out his forces and

disposed them in order of battle. His infantry he placed on the left, so

that their flank should be protected by the river. The centre was

composed of cavalry, among whom he took up his own station, whilst the

right wing was allocated to a body of Saracens under Arethas, a sheikh

who had been induced to become an ally of the Empire as a counterpoise

to the power of Alamundar. On the other side two divisions only were

made, the Persians occupying the right and the Saracens the left. As

usual the engagement was begun by the archers, who consumed nearly

two-thirds of the day in emptying their quivers. The Persians, however,

shot out weakly with relaxed strings, and their darts were to be seen

continually leaping backwards after impinging on cuirasses, helmets, or

shields. But the Byzantine bowmen, though much fewer in number, were

more robust, and almost always succeeded in transfixing those whom they

struck with their arrows. A determined charge on the Romans by the best

troops of the enemy ensued, upon which the tribesmen led by Arethas,

cowed by the superior prestige of Alamundar, fled almost without

striking a blow. As a consequence Belisarius, with his cavalry, was

surrounded on three sides, and subjected to a fierce attack which it was

impossible to resist. A band of two thousand Isaurians, who had been

among those most eager for a conflict, scarcely dared to use their

weapons, and nearly all of them were slain on the spot. A large number

of the centre, however, exhausted though they were with fasting,

defended themselves strenuously, and inflicted great loss on their

opponents. When at length Belisarius saw that there was no hope for the

residue of his cavalry but annihilation, he drew them off rapidly to the

left, and joined those of the infantry who still held their ground on

the river's bank. There, with great presence of mind, he improvised a

phalanx, dismounting himself and ordering all his horsemen to follow his

example. With serried shields and projecting lances they formed an

impenetrable mass which every effort of the enemy failed to break. Again

and again the whole body of the Persian horse rode down upon the

bristling phalanx; but the Romans drove them back with lance thrusts,

and so terrified the animals by clashing their shields, that they shook

their riders off. The conflict was only terminated by nightfall, when

the Persians returned to their camp, and Belisarius, having obtained

possession of a ferry-boat, transferred the remnant of the army to a

safe retreat on an adjacent island of the river. Next day he summoned a

batch of transports from Callinicus, and in a short time all were

securely lodged within the town.[104]

Soon after the battle on the Euphrates Justinian recalled Belisarius to

Constantinople and entrusted him with the organization of an expedition

which he contemplated against the Vandals in the west. The chief command

in the east then devolved on Sittas.[105] As for the Persian generals

who had been opposed to Belisarius in the two leading engagements of the

war, they incurred almost equal odium in the eyes of their royal master.

The Mirrhanes was deprived of the rich insignia of an order of nobility

which conferred a dignity second only to that of the throne; whilst

Azarathes, who claimed the honours of a victorious general on his

reappearance at court, could produce no evidence of his success and,

after a muster of the troops, was upbraided by Cavades for having lost

the half of his army.[106]

At this juncture Justinian seems almost to have despaired of obtaining a

peace on any equitable terms from Persia, although he kept his legates,

Rufinus and Hermogenes, on the confines of both empires in continual

readiness to institute negotiations. He began, therefore, to devise some

means of neutralizing the injurious effect of being in perpetual

conflict with his impracticable neighbour. To provoke a hostile

incursion against his antagonist from some remote frontier might force

him to suspend his assaults on the Empire; whilst the serious

interference with Byzantine commerce due to the import of silk across

his enemy's dominions being in abeyance would disappear if the trade in

that indispensable commodity could be diverted to some friendly route.

The geographical and political situation of Aethiopia or Axum and the

amicable relations of that kingdom with the Empire seemed to satisfy all

the conditions essential to the success of this project. The

civilization of Axum and part of its population had originally been

derived from the Arabian province of Yemen, on the opposite side of the

Red Sea. In the course of time the offspring prospered and turned upon

its parent; and by the middle of the fourth century the Negus[107] of

Axum had become the overlord of his less powerful neighbour, the king of

the Homerites or Himyarites, as the inhabitants of that district of

Arabia were called in this age. Christian missions began to penetrate

these regions shortly after the reign of Constantine, and at the present

time the Axumites were enthusiastic votaries of that religion and of

Rome. Himyar, however, was full of Jews who had fled before Hadrian and

his predecessors after the subjection of Palestine and the destruction

of Jerusalem, and, therefore, of religious dissension; and the

championship of the Cross more than once furnished an occasion for the

Aethiopian despot to carry his arms into the Arabian kingdom for the

maintenance of his rather precarious suzerainty. Only recently, in the

reign of Justin (_c._ 524), the Negus of the day, Elesbaas,[108] had

crossed the gulf, expelled a Jewish ruler, and established Esimphaeus, a

Christian, in his stead.[109]

To Elesbaas, therefore, Justinian determined to apply, and forthwith

detached an ambassador named Julian to enlist his aid against Persia.

The embassy, provided with a letter and suitable presents, took ship for

Alexandria, navigated the Nile to Coptos, crossed the desert to

Berenice, and from thence sailed down the Red Sea to Adule.[110] The

Negus was transported with joy as soon as he heard that a party of Roman

delegates was approaching Axum, and advanced from his capital to meet

them sustained by all the excess of barbaric state. He was standing on a

lofty car adorned with plates of gold, which was drawn by four

elephants. His guards crowded around him, each one armed with a pair of

gilded spears and a small gilt shield, and a company of musicians blew

with exultant strains on their shrill pipes. The dusky potentate himself

was almost devoid of clothing proper, but was decked from head to foot

with a profusion of precious ornaments. On his head he wore a white

turban interwoven with gold thread and four golden chains hung from it

on each side. A linen mantle weighted with pearls and golden nails, open

in front, flowed from his shoulders; and a kilt seamed with precious

metal was dependent from his girdle. A necklace and bracelets of gold,

with arms similar to those borne by his guards, completed his

equipment.[111]

Julian knelt and presented his letter, but was immediately bidden to

rise, whilst the Negus kissed the seal of the missive, and listened to

its contents as read by an interpreter. He at once promised compliance

with all Justinian's requests; an army of his vassal Saracens should

march against the Sassanian realm, and the cargoes of silk from Malabar

should be diverted from the Persian Gulf to be discharged at Adule.[112]

After the lapse of a year another envoy was despatched from

Constantinople, and Nonnosus, one of a family of legates, familiarized

with these regions by constant visits, traversed not only Axum, but

Yemen, in order to stimulate the execution of these important

schemes.[113] In the end, however, the project failed of achievement;

the tribes of Himyar shrunk from entering on a long and arduous journey

over the sandy wastes to attack an enemy whom they believed to be more

bellicose than themselves, while the shipmasters could not be induced to

avoid the Persian ports, where they found eager buyers for all the silk

they could procure.[114] The death of Elesbaas occurred shortly

afterwards, but not before an interior revolt had freed Himyar for a

time from the Aethiopian supremacy.[115]

In the next phase of the war, martial activity centred around

Martyropolis, a fortified town of Roman Armenia, situated on the river

Nymphius. A considerable Persian army, under several veteran generals,

beset the stronghold with all the engines proper to a determined siege

in the warfare of the period. At the same time Cavades, octogenarian

though he was, resolute in his purpose to do all the damage possible to

his adversaries, provoked an artificial irruption of the Huns into Roman

territory, and opened the Caspian Gates to a great host of those

barbarians. At his instigation they carried their depredations rapidly

to the south, and in the autumn of 531 effected a junction with the

Persian forces around Martyropolis. Buzes and Bessas commanded the

garrison of the town, but without confidence in their powers of

resistance to the assault; for not only were the walls easily

surmountable in many places, but the beleaguered were ill supplied with

sustenance, and with warlike machines to repel the assaults of the

enemy.[116] Nor had the Byzantines any troops in the field with whom

they could hope to raise the siege; and Sittas, though posted at only

one day's march from the scene of hostilities, feared to approach nearer

with the slender army at his disposal.[117] From time to time successful

sallies were made by the besieged, and Bessas, who was a bold cavalry

leader, now, as on former occasions, found opportunities of inflicting

considerable loss on the foe; but nevertheless it was felt that a crisis

disastrous to the Romans could not long be delayed.[118] In this impass

a stratagem was concerted and carried out effectively, which blunted the

ardour of the siege and eventually saved the town. As in all ages, it

was the practice to maintain spies in an enemy's camp; and between both

nations there was a habitual interchange of renegades who were anxious

to betray the secrets of their country, attracted by the substantial

rewards which generally accrued to such treason. A man of this class was

now at hand, one whose reliability had been tested by the Emperor

himself, and he was instructed to reveal to the Persian generals with

professed good faith his pretended discovery that the Huns, corrupted by

Byzantine gold, only awaited an opportune moment to change sides in

their warfare. The spy executed his commission faithfully, and his

communication was listened to with consternation by the military

council.[119] The Orientals, distrustful of their uncongenial allies,

relaxed their energies, and the siege was protracted until the severity

of the weather compelled a cessation of arms for the season. The

Persians gladly agreed to a truce and retired into winter quarters, but

the Huns, now freed from control, began to work their way towards the

south with Antioch as their goal, plundering every assailable habitation

which lay in their track. They were pursued unremittingly by Bessas, who

cut up marauding bands, captured their spoils, and finally succeeded in

chasing the survivors out of the country.[120]

In the meantime an event had occurred which produced an immediate change

in the relations of the two empires, and virtually ended the war before

the advent of spring called for a resumption of hostilities. Early in

September Cavades was suddenly prostrated by illness, whereupon he

summoned Chosroes, and caused him to be crowned hastily at his bedside.

A few days afterwards he expired, at the age of eighty-two in the

forty-fourth year of his reign.[121] As usual in Oriental successions

the new Shah was unable to seat himself firmly on the throne without

making away with several of his near relatives who formed a nucleus

around whom malcontents might cluster.[122] Preoccupied, therefore, with

his domestic affairs, he was anxious to be relieved from the onus of a

foreign war, and signified shortly to the Roman legates his willingness

to negotiate a treaty.[123] Rufinus was credited with being a peculiarly

grateful personage to Chosroes owing to his having consistently advised

Cavades, during his long intimacy with him, to elevate his third son to

the throne. It was also reported that the Persian queen-mother was in

secret sympathy with Christianity and, therefore, used her influence

over her son to promote peaceful relations with the Byzantines.[124] But

the lessons of the war had not been lost on Chosroes, and he felt strong

enough to impose conditions so exacting that the Roman plenipotentiaries

were unable to accept them on their own responsibility. Invasion of the

empire in force had been the distinctive feature of every campaign and,

while Persian territory had been subjected only to some desultory raids,

the brunt of the war had been borne by the Byzantines on their own

ground. Under an obligation to perform the double journey in seventy

days, Rufinus posted to Constantinople to hold a special conference with

Justinian. He returned with a virtual consent to all the effective

demands of Chosroes, and in less than a year after the death of Cavades

a treaty was ratified under the reassuring title of "the Perpetual

Peace." By this convention the substantial captures made by each party

were to be exchanged; the fugitive Iberians were to be allowed the

option of residing peacefully in their own country or of remaining under

the protection of Justinian; Dara was not to be demolished, but the

military Duke of Mesopotamia was to remove his headquarters from thence

to an unimportant town at some distance from the frontier;[125] and the

Caspian Gates were to be left in the sole charge of Persia. The two last

articles were concessions on the part of the Shahinshah, to

counterbalance which the Romans agreed to pay an indemnity of one

hundred and ten centenaries of gold (£440,000).[126] Rufinus deposited

the amount in specie at Nisibis, and the war was thus terminated with

some military glory to the Byzantines, but with no inconsiderable loss

of their material possessions, which accrued for the most part to the

advantage of the Orientals.

During the whole of this period the barbarians to the north of the

Danube and Euxine were kept in a state of active commotion by various

influences; and, if at any moment the countless wild hordes, who peopled

that immense region, could have been moved by a unanimous impulse to

hurl their combined force against the Empire, it seems impossible but

that the Byzantine administration must have succumbed at once and

finally to the irresistible shock. But there were always three forces in

being which co-operated to avert such a catastrophe, and saved the

Empire for many centuries from sudden annihilation. Its lengthened

preservation in this connection was due to the diverse powers of arms,

of wealth, and of religion. Conversion to Christianity was continually

inspiring a proportion of these semi-savage races with a desire to enter

into amicable relations with the Roman Emperor, in whom they saw the

prime source of the mystical lore which they had just been taught to

regard with awe. Rich presents were despatched to the most accessible of

the barbarian rulers, who were thus induced to pledge their allegiance

to the Byzantine state.[127] These various influences not only protected

the Empire from many impending assaults, but, by animating the

barbarians with invidious feelings against each other, often caused

dissentient tribes to engage in the work of mutual self-destruction.

Lastly, the residue who actually crossed the frontier with hostile

intent were met by the Masters of Soldiers, and with varying success

checked in their advance, or cut to pieces.

The influence of religion, at the same time conjunctive and disruptive,

has already been exemplified in connection with Lazica and Iberia; and a

couple of nearly similar instances, occurring shortly after the

accession of Justinian, will be noticed explicitly in a future

chapter.[128] An illustration of the advantage derived by the Emperor

from the judicious bestowal of treasure on barbarian potentates is also

brought before us during this war with Persia.[129] Two Hunnish kings,

subsidized by Cavades, were on the march to join the Persian army with

an auxiliary force amounting to twenty thousand men. But a queen of the

Sabirian Huns, named Boarex, who had been the recipient of Justinian's

liberality, was able to put a hundred thousand of her nation under arms.

This martial female did not hesitate to attack her kindred; but, falling

on them before they could reach their destination, destroyed the

expeditionary force, slew one of the leaders, and sent the other to

Constantinople, where he was impaled on the shore at Sycae, by order of

the Emperor.[130] On the Illyrian frontier the Masters of the Forces in

that region were in almost perpetual conflict with barbarian raiders.

Previous to 529 the command on the Danube had been entrusted to Ascum, a

Christian Hun, but, being captured by a marauding band of his own race

during a skirmish, he was carried off and permanently retained by them

in their native abodes. He was succeeded by Mundus, a Gepœd of royal

race, who had formerly been in the service of Italy. After the death of

Theodoric, however, he placed his sword at the disposal of Justinian, to

whom he proved a faithful servant not only in the defence of Illyricum,

but shortly afterwards at a critical period of his reign in the

capital.[131]

[1] The minute description of Justinian's personal appearance is due to

Procopius (Anecd., 8), and Malala (xviii, p. 425), whose descriptions

seem to correspond fairly. There are several representations of

Justinian, but it is doubtful whether any of them rise to actual

portraiture. Those found on a large gold medal formerly in a museum at

Paris (stolen 1835) were probably the best (reproduced by Isambert, _op.

cit._; Diehl, _op. cit._, p. 23). He appears in the great mosaics at

Ravenna (see p. 91), and also in a half-length figure in St. Apollinare

of the same town. Further there is a MS. sketch at CP. (Mordtmann, _op.

cit._, p. 65). In addition there is the current coinage, especially the

copper, on which his image is impressed. Generally the face is

pronouncedly round, but, one and all, these likenesses are too crude to

convey any physiognomical information. See also p. 308.

[2] Procopius, Anecd., 8. He relates that after the butchery of Domitian

all his statues were broken to pieces, but his wife afterwards fitted

the fragments of his body together and caused a new figure to be

sculptured from them. There is an almost perfect statue of Domitian in

the Vatican, which may be the one he alludes to, if there is any truth

in his story.

[3] Jn. Malala, xviii, p. 425; Chron. Paschal, an. 566. "You would have

taken him for a man with the mind of a sheep," says Procopius, Anecd.,

13.

[4] His character and manners can be collected from Procopius (Anecd.,

6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 22, etc.) and Zonaras, xiv, 8. His personal influence

is well illustrated by the incident already related (p. 303) of his

rescuing a patrician from the mob although at the time he was only a

Candidate; and by his deliberate _mésalliance_ with Theodora being

permitted without a murmur from Church or State. His stolid conviction

may be compared to that of Robespierre, of whom, when he first began to

speak on public affairs, Mirabeau remarked, "That young man will go far;

he believes every word he says."

[5] Procopius, Anecd., 8; 13. In many of his enactments he emphasizes

his unremitting assiduity in the interest of his subjects, _e.g._: "We

shun no difficulties, continually watching, fasting, and labouring for

our subjects, even beyond what can be borne by the human frame"; Nov.

xxx, 11; cf. viii, _pf._; lxxx, _pf._, etc.

[6] Procopius, Anecd., 22. "He was excessively senseless and like a dull

ass that follows whoever holds the bridle," _ibid._, 8. "As to his

opinions he was lighter than dust, and at the mercy of those who wished

to urge him to one side or the other," _ibid._, 13.

[7] There is but one representation of Theodora, that in the companion

mosaic to the one above-mentioned at Ravenna, but the face is too

unfinished and expressionless to give any idea of her features or

character.

[8] Procopius, Anecd., 12.

[9] Procopius, Anecd., 15.

[10] Procopius, Anecd., 15. This Porphyrio, such was the popular name

bestowed on the monster, must have been a cachalot or sperm whale, which

inhabits tropical and sub-tropical seas. It grows to a length of 50 or

60 feet. The males fight viciously among themselves. Small ships have

been damaged by the animal when provoked by an attack.

[11] Nov. viii, 1. Officials, on taking office, had to swear to

Justinian and Theodora conjointly; _ibid._, _jusjur._; cf. Nov. xxviii,

5; xxix, 4; xxx, 6, 11. Zonaras remarks, "In the time of Justinian there

was not a monarchy, but a dual reign. His partner for life was not less

potent, perhaps even more so than himself," xiv, 6; cf. Paul Silent., i,

62. The reign has been compared to that of Louis XIV; but the character

of that monarch was more evident in Theodora than in her husband.

[12] "In fact she was much abler than he was and highly ingenious in

finding new and varied expedients." Zonaras, _loc. cit._

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

[14] Procopius, Anecd., 2.

[15] _Ibid._, 15.

[16] Procopius, Anecd., 30.

[17] _Ibid._

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

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

[20] The campaigns of Trajan are very imperfectly recorded in the only

extant account, that of Dion Cassius as preserved in the careless

epitome of Xiphilinus; Zonaras, xi, 21. It is certain that he took the

twin capitals of Parthia, Seleucia and Ctesiphon, which faced each other

from opposite sides of the Euphrates, and advanced to the Persian Gulf.

He marched into Arabia, but the evidence that he penetrated to the

Indian Ocean, as Tillemont thinks, is insufficient.

[21] The capture of Seleucia by Avidius Cassius (165), and his brutal

massacre of 300,000 of its inhabitants, mostly Greeks, is often alluded

to as an irreparable blow to Western civilization in the East; Dion

Cas., lxxi, 2, etc. Severus took Ctesiphon in 199; Herodian; Hist.

August. In 283 Carus also took Ctesiphon; Hist. August.; Aurelius Vict.

Under Diocletian, Galerius extended the Empire beyond the Tigris; Aurel.

Vict.; Eutropius, ix.

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

Vit. Alex.

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

garden of fertility.

[24] Most information as to the rise, etc., of Ardeshír (Artakhshathr on

coins, that is, Artaxerxes as adapted to their language by the Greeks),

will be found in Tabari with Nöldeke's commentary; _op. cit._; cf.

Zotenberg, _op. cit._, ii, 40. The great value of Nöldeke's book

consists not so much in the flimsy text as in his notes and excursuses

which bring together all collateral information to be found in other

writers of the period. Zotenberg's version is, of course, from the

Persian, the translation of a translation.

[25] The Great Salt Desert in the interior of Persia is somewhat

triangular, each of the sides measuring about 400 miles.

[26] Modern Orientalists are of opinion that the pictures of Persian

life given by James Morier (Hajji Baba of Ispahan, 1824, etc.) may be

applied without much loss of truth even to the age of the Achaemenians.

When we reflect that till 1888 Persia had no railway, and now only eight

miles, the verisimilitude of the statement will be apparent.

[27] See the first Fargard of the Vendidâd where the "Kine's soul,"

representing mankind, bewails her hard lot before the supreme being.

Generally the primitive conditions of life in Iran are well set forth by

Max Duncker, Hist. of Antiquity, Lond. 1881, vol. v.

[28] His actual date is unknown, and his existence at any time not

certain, but Duncker surmises this period.

[29] The Iranian mythology is summarized at length by Duncker, but the

person of Zoroaster is altogether shadowy, and his date can only be

fixed by conjecture. He is, of course, done away with altogether by some

Orientalists, _e.g._ Darmsteter. In later times, as among the modern

Persians (Parsees), the names of the opposing gods were abbreviated to

Ormuzd and Ahriman.

[30] The Persian Bible is written in a language without a name, and, it

may be added, without an alphabetical character. The name _Zend_,

however, is now firmly attached to it among Western scholars through a

mistake of the first investigators, who, always finding it coupled with

_Avesta_, thought it must apply to the language of the sacred text. It

actually means commentary. Zend is a sister tongue of that spoken in the

same age across the Indus, and the oldest specimens (the Gáthas of the

Avesta) by slight systematic alterations can be turned into good old

Sanskrit. The alphabet applied to it, as now preserved, is that of the

Middle Persian or Pahlavi, which was the language spoken by the

Sassanians. Old Persian, the speech of Darius and Xerxes, was written in

cuneiform (Behistun inscription, etc.), like the impressions on the

well-known clay tablets, etc., of the long-previous literature of

Babylonia. The Avesta originally consisted of twenty-one _nasks_ or

books, but less than a quarter is now extant. There is, however, an

epitome of it in the Dinkard, a religious compilation of the eighth

century. The book was unknown to the Greeks and Romans, but Pausanias

(v, 27) mentions that the Magi had a volume from which they read.

Darmsteter (Sacred Books of the East, Lond., 1895, Introd. to Vendidâd)

considers that the composition is almost in its entirety of a date

subsequent to Alexander. The sacred books of the Parsees, as far as they

have been translated, are to be found in Max Müller's series (Lond.,

1880, etc.), just mentioned, vols. iv, xxiii, xxxi (Zend-Avesta), and v,

xviii, xxiv, xxxviii (religious treatises in Pahlavi).

[31] Mithra, so-named, long enjoyed a supremacy among the Aryans both in

India and Persia. Spenta Aramaiti is one of the Amesha Spentas (later

Amshaspands, that is, "Holy Immortals," or Council of Ormuzd, but,

although they appear in the Avesta, Darmsteter (_loc. cit._) argues a

Platonic and, therefore, late origin for them. Thus Vohu Manô ("Good

Thought"), their chief and the premier of Ormuzd, appears to be an exact

counterpart of the Philonic Logos. Anahita stands for the Vedic Varuna,

the waters of the sky, but the name is that of the Babylonian Venus, and

her attributes are partly of the concupiscent type.

[32] The Vendidâd ("laws against the evil ones") is the nask which

contains all the legislation respecting rites and ceremonies, offences,

crimes, etc., punishments to be inflicted, means of expiation, etc. Like

parts of the Pentateuch, it is all in the form of a dialogue between the

prophet and the Deity.

[33] These Dakhmas, or "Towers of Silence," for the disposal of the dead

are well-known to the Anglo-Indians who have resided at Bombay, which

almost all Parsees, the present-day Zoroastrians, have adopted as their

native city. They number about 60,000.

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

[35] Agathias, ii, 24; Herodotus, _loc. cit._ Contrary to former belief

(Rawlinson, etc.), the Parthians were pious Mazdeites, as Darmsteter has

shown. Thus, when Tiridates visited Nero, he and his retinue, including

several priests, journeyed overland to avoid defiling the sea; Justin,

xli; Pliny, Hist. Nat., xxx, 17.

[36] One Shah, Balâsh, was, in fact, dethroned by the Mohbeds (Magi) for

having erected public bath-houses; Jos. Stylites, _op. cit._ (Wright).

[37] Xenophon, Oeconom., iv, 13; Xerxes, on his way to Greece, arriving

at a handsome plane tree, adorned it with jewels of gold, and left one

of his personal guards as a custodian of it; Herodotus, vii, 31.

[38] The Bareshnûm, or great ceremony of purification, lasted nine days

and consisted chiefly in the systematic application of _nirung_ or

_gomez_ (urine of kine) to different parts of the body; see West's

translation of the rubric, Sacr. Bks. of the East, xviii, 431.

[39] Vendidâd, xiii, 24 (63). The manslaughterer got off with sixty

stripes, but the bad feeder became a _peshotanu_ and received two

hundred, the maximum, it seems, actually inflicted.

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

[41] Vendidâd, xiv, 5 (9). Part of the expiation for the murder of an

otter was to kill 10,000 of every sort of noxious animal. The

punishments, or tasks imposed in lieu of, are sometimes so extravagant,

that they can only be intended to emphasize the heinousness of the sin,

a useful principle to elevate the authority of the priesthood; cf.

Herodotus, i, 140.

[42] Vendidâd, viii, 26 (74); 74 (233); xviii, 61 (123); cf. iii, 38

(130); iv, 47 (130). As will be seen from these passages a proselyte to

Mazdeism began a new life with a clean slate. Thus a member of an alien

faith could commute the severest penalty by announcing himself as a

convert to the religion of Zerdusht.

[43] Vendidâd, xiv, 2; cf. Herodotus, i, 137; vii, 194. Punishment was

inflicted with a _sraosha_ (sort of whip), and each stripe was valued at

six rupees. In practice the maximum was 200 stripes for a _peshotanu_ or

culprit of the worst class, whatever the nature of the crime, but when

it was really meant to decree the death penalty the allotted number was

much greater, even up to 10,000; see Darmsteter, _op. cit._, p. lxxxv.

In the entourage of the monarch, however, the same cruel punishments

were maintained as have always been associated with Oriental despotism,

viz., flaying alive (Ammianus, xxiii, 6; Agathias, iv, 23), and even

"the boat" (Plutarch, Artaxerxes; Damascius, Vit. Isidori).

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

[45] Phraates V of Parthia. His mother was Thea Urania Musa, an Italian

slave girl presented to his father by Augustus; Josephus, Antiq., xviii,

2. The relations of Parysatis to Artaxerxes and of Sisygambis to Darius

Cod. were very close, but are not known to have been actually conjugal.

[46] These filio-maternal marriages have been generally discredited by

modern historians (Rawlinson, Oriental Monarchies, ii, 351; even partly

by Max Duncker, _op. cit._, v, 220) through their not being in

possession of all the classical evidence and having apparently none of

the Oriental. Probably the first to make the practice known in the West

was Quintus Curtius, and lastly Agathias. But the evidence of Chrysostom

alone, a Syrian reared on the borders of Persia, would be conclusive. As

usual, he anatomizes the subject. Preaching against sexual abandonment,

he says: "Love, you maintain, is not a matter of will.... Whence does it

arise, then? From a beautiful form which strikes the wound, you answer.

Your excuse is an idle one.... Were not Joseph and David handsome, the

latter especially so in the eyes, which is the most attractive style of

beauty? But was any man enamoured of them? By no means, for love does

not arise from mere admiration. Many have mothers most distinguished for

their beauty, but do their sons, therefore, fall in love with them?

Perish the thought! They admire them, but do not yield to a disgraceful

passion. Ah! you will urge, this is a law of nature. Of what nature,

tell me? Because they are our mothers, you say. Do you not know that the

Persians, without any compulsion, cohabit with their mothers? Not one or

two, but the whole nation. Whence it is evident that this disease is not

inspired by beauty, but by a vice of the mind"; In Epist. ii ad Cor.

Hom. vii, 6 (in Migne, x, 451). Contemporary Parsees also wish to

repudiate the idea that their forefathers solemnized these incestuous

nuptials, and treat it as a libel of the Greeks, as modern Mazdeism

yields to no closer union than that of first cousins. The whole

question, however, of consanguineous marriage has been threshed out from

the evidence of the Pahlavi texts by West (Sacr. Bks. of the East,

xviii, 389 _et seq._), who shows how strenuously the Mohbeds laboured to

inculcate the practice as a pious duty. A special term in Pahlavi,

_Khvêtûk-das_, meaning literally "a giving of one's own," was applied to

it. There is no clear reference to the custom in the extant part of the

Avesta, but in the Dinkard epitome (ix, 60; Sacr. Bks. of the East,

xxxvii) great stress is laid on the merit of adhering to it, and in the

same theological compilation a long chapter (iii, 82, 431) is devoted to

the defence and exposition of Khvêtûk-das. As West observes, however, it

is evident from the amount of space and argument expended on the subject

that the priesthood had some difficulty in bending an unwilling laity to

comply with their injunctions. We may note that the Persians were not

the only race addicted to such marriages. According to Strabo (IV, v,

4), they were habitual among the Irish of his time ("mothers and

sisters"); and even the aboriginal Macedonians favoured them, so that

when the _Oedipus Rex_ of Sophocles was played in that country the

audience jeered at the distress of the titular character. An amusing

dialogue between actor and audience then ensued; see Tertullian, Ad

Nat., 16.

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

[48] Herodotus, iii, 68, 88; Athenaeus, xiii, 3, etc.; Ammianus, xxiii,

6. As usual in the East, women were kept out of sight; Plutarch,

Themistocles. Still, Queen Statira used to drive about openly in public;

_ibid._, Artaxerxes. Cf. Max Duncker, _op. cit._, v, 219.

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

f. Numis., iv, vii.

[50] See the letter of Tansar to the king of Tabaristân (Ilyrcania);

Journal asiatique, 1894, i (text and French transl.). This, according to

Darmsteter, is the earliest and most authentic document of

Zoroastrianism. The best MS. is in the East India House. From it we

learn that under the Parthians the unity of Iran was gradually dissolved

into a number of principalities, in which each king claimed a practical

independence and set up a fire-altar of his own. Ardeshír extinguished

all these subordinate fire-altars and made himself supreme in his

capital of Istakhr. The letter has been largely interpolated at a later

date, especially by the long apologue of the King of the Apes. Partly

against Darmsteter see Mills' Zoroastrianism, 1905, etc.

[51] He treated the traditions of the old religion pretty freely and

abolished whatever did not accord with his scheme of restoring the

empire of the Persians; _ibid._

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

[53] See Darmsteter, _op. cit._, p. xlvii. The story of Arda Viraf's

visit to heaven and hell (part of the lost Spend Nask) under the

influence of a narcotic in the presence of a great conventicle of the

Magi, in search of spiritual guidance for the restoration of Mazdeism,

seems to be a mere legend to be referred to the sixth century rather

than to the times and intention of Ardeshír. It has been cited as

serious history by some former writers.

[54] Letter of Tansar, _ut supra_, cf. Herodian, vi, 3. H. is generally

treated as a romancer, but in this instance he is confirmed by

independent evidence. His statement that Ardeshír had the best of it in

a great battle with Alex. Severus is rejected in favour of that of

Lampridius (Hist. Aug.), who says the Roman was the victor. The war on

this occasion, as often subsequently, was probably quite indecisive.

[55] See Sayce's Babylonians, etc., Lond., 1900, and other works of that

class which condense the results of the excavations in progress on that

site.

[56] See p. 267. Fragments of the Manichaean Bible recently discovered

in Central Asia show that Mani was a native of Babylon.

[57] Sozomen, ii, 9; Theodoret, v, 39. Some were partly flayed, on the

face and the hands, or the back. Others were thrown bound into pits with

mice, etc. The first of these persecutions seems to have sprung from the

religious fervour caused by Sapor's zeal for the faith; the second was

originated by a fanatical Christian bishop, who attacked and destroyed a

Pyreum or Fire-temple. See Hoffmann's Akt. Pers. Märt., Leipsic, 1880.

[58] Asseman, Bibl. Orient., iii, 2. They had the ear of the Shah as

against any of the Orthodox in Persia; John Eph. Com. (Land, etc.), p.

52.

[59] Nöldeke, _op. cit._, p. 145; Zotenberg, _op. cit._, ii, 148. They

were soiled by her menstrual flux, she said. To touch anything of the

kind would have subjected him to a ceremony of purification and,

perhaps, a flogging; Vendidâd, xviii, 5. The scene reminds us of that in

_The Merry Wives of Windsor_, where Falstaff is carried out in the

foul-clothes basket. Procopius relates that she changed clothes with

him, and the Shah walked out disguised as a woman; De Bel. Pers., i, 6.

[60] This was not his first sojourn with the Hephthalites. His father

Peroz, who ultimately perished in a battle with these Huns, had left him

in Bactria as a hostage for the payment of an indemnity. In Tabari the

story goes that on his journey thither he stopped incognito at the house

of a noble (N.) or peasant (Z.), where he was accommodated with a

daughter of the family as an informal wife. When Balâsh was dethroned

(see p. 379), he returned to take up the succession by the same route

and found that the girl had become the mother of a boy, the same who was

afterwards known as Chosroes, his favourite son (see p. 314).

[61] "Hence he set the lower against the upper classes; wretches of

every sort were mingled with the best blood; and it became usual for

those who coveted other people's goods to seize on them; for the

disorderly to riot around; and for libertines to gratify their passions

and approach the noblest women, whom previously they never had a thought

of intimacy with"; Tabari, p. 154 (N.). This passage with the context is

not in Zotenberg.

[62] The details of this affair are incompletely known. The Greeks seem

never to have heard of Mazdak, but confound his followers with the

Manichaeans. The above account is based on that of Theophanes, modified

so as to accord with Nöldeke's views; _op. cit._, p. 457 (Excurs.). He

thinks the surname of Nushirvan ("the blessed") was bestowed on Chosroes

for the part he played in this massacre. Existing Manichaeans were also

involved in it.

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

[64] Nöldeke, _op. cit._, p. 221. He was concealed with "clothes" until

he settled himself in a dignified position. But in Zotenberg (p. 205)

the clothes become merely a covering to keep the dust off the jewels.

Such differences are perpetual throughout the two versions of Tabari. On

coins and sculptures the Shah wears a crown surmounted by a pedunculated

ball of considerable size. At the siege of Amida (359) Sapor wore a

golden ram's head instead of a crown; Ammianus, xix, 1. Theophylactus

(who is noted for his turgidity) gives a description of Hormidz IV

sitting in state on his throne (590). "He was clad with a regal robe of

precious material. His tiara of gold and jewels was brilliant with the

effulgence of carbuncles. A profusion of pearls glittered around the

crest, scintillating on a sea of smaragdite, so that the eyes were

almost blinded by the dazzling exuberance of the gems. His trousers, a

priceless sample of the weaver's art, were embroidered on cloth of

gold"; iv, 3. Cedrenus (i, 721) also furnishes some curious details as

what was found when Heraclius broke into the treasure city of Gazaca and

rifled the palace of Chosroes Parviz (622). The contents of a private

fire-temple astonished them. "On entering the spherical chamber he found

the impious effigy of Chosroes sitting, as it were, in the heavens among

the sun, moon, and stars, whom the fanatic worshipped as gods.

Sceptre-bearing angels stood around, and the wretch had devised machines

which discharged water like rain, and emitted a sound as of thunder. All

this was consumed by fire."

[65] Ammianus, xxiii, 6; cf. Menander, Leg., p. 335; Theophylact., iv,

8; letters in which Chosroes, Nush. and Parviz, assume all their titles.

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

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

[68] As evidenced notably in the struggle between the successful rebel

general, Bahram, and Chosroes Parviz; Theophylact. Sim., iv.

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

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

[71] Herodotus, i, 136. Jn. Lydus (_loc. cit._) says the whole nation

was trained to arms, and always ready to enter on a campaign.

[72] Tabari (N.), p. 245. In Zotenberg (p. 228) the number is given as

eight score, which would probably weigh the horse too heavily. Some

injunctions as to armour are given in Vendidâd, xiv (32). Here also

thirty arrows are recommended. For slingers, thirty stones each man is

the fixed number. The horse and his rider were so well shielded with

metal that Ammianus speaks of them as an "iron cavalry"; xix, 1; cf.

xxv, i.

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

[74] In Zotenberg, the reason why Kavádh was led to reform the taxation

is accounted for by an anecdote (p. 241). One day while hunting he

became separated from his party, and sat down to rest himself near a

peasant's cottage. While there, he noticed a child bringing two or three

grapes to its mother, who at once seized them and with great concern ran

to attach them again to the vine, exclaiming that the inspector had not

yet been round to assess the amount of the crop. The absurdity and

harshness of the tithe law was thus practically exemplified to the Shah.

Both versions relate that a strange scribe who ventured to dispute the

soundness of the proposed financial change in an assembly convened to

hear it announced, being convicted of starting a futile objection by

Cavades, was thereupon, at a nod from the monarch, belaboured by his

fellow scribes with their ink-horns till he expired. His point was that

the relations of the land and its owners would vary continually, and he

was met by the statement that there would be a yearly survey to readjust

the burdens.

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

[76] Zachariah Myt., ix, 6.

[77] Besides the objective evidence, there is a direct statement of the

fact; Theophylactus Sim., v, 6.

[78] The practical application of the doctrine of the Avesta has been

described at considerable length by Max Duncker (_op. cit._, v), but the

school of Darmsteter would aver that his exposition applies with more

accuracy to the age of the Sassanians than to that of the Achaemenians,

whom alone he deals with.

[79] Some remains, almost certainly those of fire-temples, exist, but

they are architecturally insignificant, being, in fact, merely low stone

towers a few feet square. The interior was only a cell with just room

enough to accommodate a small altar, on which a perpetual fire was kept

up; see Ferguson, Hist. Archit., Lond., 1874, i, 202; cf. Perrot and

Chipiez, Persian Art, i, 892.

[80] The chief work which gives representations of Sassanian

architecture is that of Flandin and Coste, Voyage en Perse, Paris, 1851.

Many have been copied by Rawlinson, _op. cit._

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

[82] See Tristram's Land of Moab, Lond., 1873, and for a restoration,

Ferguson, _op. cit._, i, 392. The slabs have now been removed to a

Berlin museum, where they are attributed to the Ghassanides, an Arab

dynasty.

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

[84] The work on which the well-known poem of Firdausi was founded

(_c._ 1,000). There is much theological exegesis in Pahlavi, but, except

the Avesta and its commentaries, this is post-Mohammedan. Much of

it has been translated by West, as stated above. The chief works in

the collection are the Dinkard, a sheaf of treatises in nine books; the

Bundahish, or "Story of Creation," a sort of Iranian Genesis, but of

greater length; and the Sad-Dar, a controversial work, in which the

follower of Mazda is taught to refute the "twaddle" of Christians and,

guardedly, of Mohammedans.

[85] For the details of this war we have the first-rate account of

Procopius (De Bel. Pers., i, 12-22), an eye-witness of a great part of

it. Additional information on some events can be gleaned from Zachariah

Myt. (ix, 1-7) and Jn. Malala, both nearly contemporary. The later

chronicles are practicably negligible.

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

the passage with Procopius.

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

doubtful, but the intention is clear.

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

[89] Malala calls him the eldest son, but in Procopius Caoses is the

name given to the eldest; _loc. cit._, 11; see p. 314.

[90] Hunnish Foederati. According to Ammianus (xxxi, 2) they almost

lived on horseback, often not dismounting even to sleep.

[91] See Oman (_op. cit._, 28) for a plan of the battle with remarks. It

does not quite accord with the phraseology of Procopius, but I find it

impossible to understand him in any other way.

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

[93] The enemy, says Procopius, kept the Romans standing in line all

the forenoon to prevent their having their midday meal; they themselves

did not eat till sundown.

[94] Bury (_op. cit._) makes him only twenty-five, but later, in 562,

represents him as being near seventy. His age can only be guessed at

from Procopius, De Bel. Pers., i, 12.

[95] If we adopt Oman's interpretation of the tactics of Belisarius

(which requires the interchange of "+aristera+" and "+dexia+") the

subsequent evolutions of the battle become quite clear. Following the

text as it stands it seems to me that they would have been impossible.

But in the first case "left" is due to an evidently stupid emendation of

Maltretus ("+dexia+" now restored by Haury).

[96] Gold mines worked by the Persians were at Pharangium, and the place

was betrayed by the commandant in order that he might embezzle the stock

of ore which he happened to have in hand; Procopius, _loc. cit._, 15.

Jn. Malala (p. 455) seems to be partly in conflict with the above. He

says the output was formerly divided between both nations, but in the

time of Anastasius was wholly ceded to the Romans.

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

[98] Jn. Malala, xviii, p. 430: "He became engaged to her at the house

of Antiochus, near the Hippodrome." This was probably an Imperial

appanage or the house of some noble to whose guardianship the sisters

had been confided on the elevation of Theodora.

[99] Cf. Procopius (_loc. cit._, 16), with Malala (pp. 449-450). He

harked back to the old quarrel with Anastasius over the loan; see p.

176.

[100] Jn. Malala, pp. 445, 455; Procopius, Anecd., 11, 18. I pass over

events in which religion was the chief question at issue, as the whole

can be treated most instructively in a special chapter; see below, chap.

xiv.

[101] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 18; cf. Malala, p. 462. The latter gives

some details as to the mischief already done by the marauders, and

states that the Antiocheans began to fly in terror to the sea coast.

Gabbulae was about ninety miles east of Antioch.

[102] They were at this time almost exactly on the track of Xenophon

when he accompanied Cyrus nearly a thousand years previously through a

country then strange to the Greeks, but now become a part of their

native land. His description is familiar to those of the old school: "In

this place the earth was smooth all over, like the sea, and full of

wormwood. Every other kind of shrub or reed was sweet-smelling and of

the class of aromatics, but there was nothing in the way of a tree....

With the Euphrates on the right we arrived at Pylae. In these stages

many of the beasts of burden perished of hunger; for there was no grass,

nor any sort of tree, but the whole country was bare," etc.; Anabasis,

i, 5. He adds that the only occupation the inhabitants had was digging

up mill-stones, which they took to Babylon for sale.

[103] Hermogenes was also present at this time, but only through having

fallen in with the army as he was on his way to Hierapolis, where

Rufinus was constantly stationed as the most convenient post from which

to open up diplomatic relations with Ctesiphon. Zachariah Myt. relates

that Azarathes begged Belisarius to postpone the battle on account of

the "Nazarenes and Jews" in the Persian army, who were also keeping the

fast.

[104] Malala (p. 464), however, shows up Belisarius in a very

unfavourable light. As soon as he saw that the day was lost, he seized

his standard, jumped into a boat, and rowed away with all speed to

Callinicus. But Sunicas, the leader of the cavalry he had abandoned,

dismounted and sustained the attack of the enemy as described by

Procopius. It is safest to believe the latter.

[105] Here again Zachariah and Malala (p. 466) differ from Procopius,

and assert that Belisarius was superseded on account of his failure on

the Euphrates. But subsequent events show that P. is more to be trusted,

and that Justinian attached small blame to Belisarius.

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

[107] "Nejâshi" is the nearest transliteration of the Semitic title; see

Nöldeke, _op. cit._, p. 195; Zotenberg, _op. cit._, p. 182, etc.

[108] Ela-Atsbeha is the correct name as found on coins; see

Schlumberger, Rev. Numismat., 1886.

[109] Most information about these nations will be found in Godefroy ad

Cod. Theod., XII, xii, 2, and Act. Sanct. (Bol.) lviii, 660-762 (Mart.

Arethas). For a clue to recent additions see Diehl, _op. cit._, p. 392

_et seq._, and below, chap. xiv.

[110] Jn. Malala (p. 457) indicates that the regular route to Axume was

still the same as that described above from earlier writers when I was

sketching the commercial activities of the age; see p. 190. He places

the embassy before the action on the Euphrates, but his chronological

sequence is often wrong. From Procopius (_loc. cit._, 19, _et seq._) it

seems to have been before or at least about the same time. The Berenice

mentioned by Procopius (De Aedif., vi, 2) is not that on the Red Sea

(see p. 190), but on the Great Syrtis.

[111] We owe this description of Soudanese pageantry to Jn. Malala

(xviii, p. 457), who professes to be copying a report published by the

ambassador himself.

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

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

Photius.

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

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

below.

[116] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 21. It should be noted that P. is not now

relating his own experiences, as he returned to Constantinople with

Belisarius.

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

Myt., _loc. cit._, 6.

[118] The exploits of Bessas are dwelt on by Zachariah Myt., _loc. cit._,

5 _et seq._ Most details of the siege are given by Malala (p. 468

_et seq._), which, however, I omit here as we shall have more

interesting opportunities later on of studying the mode of procedure at

sieges in this age.

[119] Procopius, _loc. cit._

[120] He became rich through these successes, says Zachariah Myt. It

seems that in such cases the spoils became the property of the army,

and no attempt was made to restore what was recaptured to the former

owners.

[121] Orientalists consider that Malala (p. 471) is best informed here.

Procopius relates that Cavades left a will, on the strength of which

Chosroes was elected Shah by an assembly of the nobles in opposition to

the claim of the eldest son, Caoses; _loc. cit._, 21. Sometimes

Theophanes seems to copy Malala, but in this case he is so ignorant as

to make Chosroes succeed in 525!

[122] Some details of this dissension are given by Procopius; _loc.

cit._, 23. A party conspired to set up a younger Cavades, grandson of

the elder through his second son Zames, who was debarred by reason of

his being blind of one eye. Ultimately this Kavádh fled to CP. (_c._

546), and it is supposed that he is the authority whence Procopius

derived his knowledge of Persian history. The historian, however, gives

vent to his suspicion that this fugitive was an impostor, the real

pretender having most probably perished.

[123] Procopius, _loc. cit._, 22; Jn. Malala, p. 471. According to the

first the Roman legates sued for peace with cringing flattery, whereas

Malala states that Justinian's reply to an announcement from Chosroes

that he had ascended the throne was, "We do not acknowledge you as king

of Persia, nor do we permit our legates to visit you." Moreover he

taunted Chosroes with having invited the Huns, and only after the latter

had repudiated all responsibility for their acts were diplomatic

relations established.

[124] Zachariah Myt., ix, 6, 7. He says that she was privately a convert

to Christianity after a cure wrought upon her by a hermit when

physicians had failed.

[125] To Constantina: cf. De Aedif., ii, 5. A great deal of money was

then spent in rendering it worthy of its increased importance. It

appears to have been about eighty miles west of Dara.

[126] The terms of the peace are only clearly expressed by Procopius,

_loc. cit._, 22; De Aedif., ii, 5.

[127] Justinian's policy is well exemplified in a letter said to have

been written by him to a Hunnish chief: "I sent presents to you,

intending to honour the most powerful of your nation, and taking you to

be that one. But, while the presents were on their way, I hear that

another has seized them, asserting himself to be the most potent among

you. Now see to it that you prove yourself to be his superior. Take what

you have been deprived of and revenge yourself on him. Otherwise we

shall consider him to be the first, and he shall be favoured by us

accordingly, and our presents will be lost to you." As a result of this

attitude of the Emperor intestine wars broke out among the Huns, who

thus mutually destroyed each other; Jn. Antioch. (Müller), fg. 217;

Alemannus, p. 400.

[128] See ch. xiv, below.

[129] Jn. Malala, pp. 427, 430; Theophanes, an. 6,020, etc.

[130] _Ibid._ Malala says she was won over by "gifts of hospitality, a

collection of silver vases, and a considerable present in money."

[131] Jn. Malala, p. 450; Procopius, De Bel. Pers., i, 24.