DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45399#0012
2
NUMISMATA OEIENTALIA.
Croesus was conquered by Cyrus or by Artaxias, father of the Great Tigranes of Armenia, and
finally inclines to the latter opinion. Arabic and Persian writers, so far as one who can con-
sult them only in translations may judge, are wilder still. They probably had no means of
ascertaining the truth as to the events of the Parthian period. But had they known the truth,
they would have distorted it. They were ashamed to own that Asia was so long under Scythic
rule; and so not only very much abridge the duration of the Parthian Empire, and reduce the
number of its rulers, but they even venture to surnish us with wholly sanciful lists of kings,
in which pure Persian names, such as Firuz and Hormazd, figure largely.
And to conclude, there are scarcely, except coins, any certain historical monuments of
Parthian times. Setting aside the rock sculpture of Gotarzes and the ruins of ITatra, there is
scarcely a stone or brick in Asia which bears witness to Parthian handiwork. Inscriptions
there are next to none. Even in the case of the coins, their value as historical evidence is
very much diminished by the fact that hardly any, until the close of the first century of our
era, bear any name but the generic name of Arsaces. But the coins almost invariably give
portraits, and, after the reign of Orocles, the tetradrachms bear dates, so that their testimony is
after all of great value. And as far as it goes it is beyond dispute. The historian is bound to
prefer the testimony of a single undoubtedly genuine coin to the statements of a Tacitus or a
Thucydides; how much rather to the statements of a Justin or a Plutarch. In the present
paper I shall therefore push to the utmost every inference which can legitimately be drawn
srom existing coins, being careful, however, not to be led astray by the ardour of the specialist
in his pursuit.
II. OUTLINE OF HISTOKY.
The phrases “History of Parthia,” “Coinage of Parthia,” are apt to convey a false im-
pression to the unwary ear. Properly speaking, Parthia was a strip of country some hundreds
of miles east of the southern extremity of the Caspian Sea, inhabited by a hardy and enter-
prizing race of Scythic origin. Of the history of this district we know little; nor can we be
sure that any coins were ever struck there in ancient times. But for five centuries the race
of the Arsacidse, perhaps of Parthian blood, and certainly owing their sway to Parthian
armies, occupied that position of supremacy or over-lordship in Central Asia which has fallen
in turn to so many peoples—Tartar, Semitic and Arian. For five centuries the Parthian guard
was the most highly esteemed portion of the Asiatic armies ; Parthian satraps and garrisons
held in subjection the provinces which lie between Syria and India; while all the cities within
that region paid tribute to the Arsacid King of Kings, and struck money bearing his name and
type. For five centuries a people, or rather a camp, without past or future, without a religion,
an art, or a policy of its own, assumed the protectorate of the East, and saved Asia from the
arms of Home. But this people did not colonize, did not attempt to impose a language or a
polity on the vanquished, left no trace on Asiatic thought. The so-called History of Parthia
NUMISMATA OEIENTALIA.
Croesus was conquered by Cyrus or by Artaxias, father of the Great Tigranes of Armenia, and
finally inclines to the latter opinion. Arabic and Persian writers, so far as one who can con-
sult them only in translations may judge, are wilder still. They probably had no means of
ascertaining the truth as to the events of the Parthian period. But had they known the truth,
they would have distorted it. They were ashamed to own that Asia was so long under Scythic
rule; and so not only very much abridge the duration of the Parthian Empire, and reduce the
number of its rulers, but they even venture to surnish us with wholly sanciful lists of kings,
in which pure Persian names, such as Firuz and Hormazd, figure largely.
And to conclude, there are scarcely, except coins, any certain historical monuments of
Parthian times. Setting aside the rock sculpture of Gotarzes and the ruins of ITatra, there is
scarcely a stone or brick in Asia which bears witness to Parthian handiwork. Inscriptions
there are next to none. Even in the case of the coins, their value as historical evidence is
very much diminished by the fact that hardly any, until the close of the first century of our
era, bear any name but the generic name of Arsaces. But the coins almost invariably give
portraits, and, after the reign of Orocles, the tetradrachms bear dates, so that their testimony is
after all of great value. And as far as it goes it is beyond dispute. The historian is bound to
prefer the testimony of a single undoubtedly genuine coin to the statements of a Tacitus or a
Thucydides; how much rather to the statements of a Justin or a Plutarch. In the present
paper I shall therefore push to the utmost every inference which can legitimately be drawn
srom existing coins, being careful, however, not to be led astray by the ardour of the specialist
in his pursuit.
II. OUTLINE OF HISTOKY.
The phrases “History of Parthia,” “Coinage of Parthia,” are apt to convey a false im-
pression to the unwary ear. Properly speaking, Parthia was a strip of country some hundreds
of miles east of the southern extremity of the Caspian Sea, inhabited by a hardy and enter-
prizing race of Scythic origin. Of the history of this district we know little; nor can we be
sure that any coins were ever struck there in ancient times. But for five centuries the race
of the Arsacidse, perhaps of Parthian blood, and certainly owing their sway to Parthian
armies, occupied that position of supremacy or over-lordship in Central Asia which has fallen
in turn to so many peoples—Tartar, Semitic and Arian. For five centuries the Parthian guard
was the most highly esteemed portion of the Asiatic armies ; Parthian satraps and garrisons
held in subjection the provinces which lie between Syria and India; while all the cities within
that region paid tribute to the Arsacid King of Kings, and struck money bearing his name and
type. For five centuries a people, or rather a camp, without past or future, without a religion,
an art, or a policy of its own, assumed the protectorate of the East, and saved Asia from the
arms of Home. But this people did not colonize, did not attempt to impose a language or a
polity on the vanquished, left no trace on Asiatic thought. The so-called History of Parthia