DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45399#0022
12
NUMISMATA ORIENTALIA.
cessful issue with several of the neighbouring states, and made an attack upon Armenia, whence
he was, however, expelled by Pharasmanes.1 These signs of aggressiveness induced Tiberius
to listen to the Parthian malcontents, who were constantly clamouring that another of the
sons of Phraates IV. should be introduced by Roman arms. Phraates was first selected, but
he died of disease in Syria. Next Tiridates, a grandson of Phraates IV., was introduced into
Par thia by Vitellius, the Governor of Syria. Artabanus fled without striking a blow, but the
absence of any coins apparently struck by Tiridates makes it most probable that his rule was
either very short or very incomplete. It is probable that in this, as in other cases,2 Tacitus
has somewhat exaggerated the success os the Roman arms. Artabanus was soon recalled by
the nobles, and Tiridates took refuge in Syria. Indeed, at one time a Parthian invasion of
Syria was feared, but was averted by the promptness and decision of Vitellius, who even ex-
torted from Artabanus a profession of homage to the Roman Emperor. Once more, for a
short period, Artabanus was a fugitive, a certain noble named Cinnamus3 being elected in his
place; but the latter prevented a civil war by a voluntary abdication, himself placing the
diadem on his master’s head. At the same date, a.d. 40, the great city of Seleucia, on the
Tigris, revolted against the Parthian rule, and retained an autonomy, of which we possess
numismatic records, for the space of six years.
Artabanus must have died as early as a.d. 40, for we have coins of his successor under
that date. Who that successor was has been disputed. It is certain that a civil war took
place between Vardanes and Goterzes, sons os the late king,4 but it has not been considered
certain who reigned first. The coins appear to contradict the account of Josephus, who main-
tains that Vardanes succeeded, and to confirm that of Tacitus, who interpolates a short first
reign of Gotarzes after the death of Artabanus, i.e. in the year 40-41 a.d. Tacitus further
relates that after a short time, Gotarzes, having been unpopular in Parthia, was compelled to
fly to the friends of his father, the Dahae. Returning with an army of those barbarians, he
met Vardanes in the field, but a battle was avoided by a treaty in which all the concessions
seem to have been on one side. Parthia was left to Vonones, and Goterzes, to avoid all rivalry,
retired into the wilds of Hyrcania. Pie seems, however, shortly to have grown tired of in-
action, or repented of his magnanimity. Vardanes had marched westward, taken Seleucia,
threatened Armenia, and attacked Izates, the powerful Satrap of Gordyene and Atropatene;
and Goterzes took advantage of his absence to make a new effort to gain the Parthian throne.
This time he was completely successful, Vardanes was assassinated while intent on hunting,
apparently in the year 45, and no further resistance was made by his party. But Goterzes
used his success ill; and his tyranny produced a new rival in the person of Meherdates,
another descendant of Phraates, who was patronized by the Emperor Claudius, and actively
supported by Izates. But Meherdates5 had not penetrated far into Parthia when he was
1 Tac. Ann. vi. 31. 2 Josephus, A. J. xx. 3, 1.
3 As in the case of the Roman occupations of Armenia. See Num. Chron. n.s. vol. xii. p 9 sqq.
4 Tacitus seems to say of Goterzes ‘brother,’ Josephus ‘son’ (cf. Tacitus, Ann. xi. 8, and Josephus, A. J. xx. 3, 4). The
coins decide the point. s Tac. Ann. xii. 13.
NUMISMATA ORIENTALIA.
cessful issue with several of the neighbouring states, and made an attack upon Armenia, whence
he was, however, expelled by Pharasmanes.1 These signs of aggressiveness induced Tiberius
to listen to the Parthian malcontents, who were constantly clamouring that another of the
sons of Phraates IV. should be introduced by Roman arms. Phraates was first selected, but
he died of disease in Syria. Next Tiridates, a grandson of Phraates IV., was introduced into
Par thia by Vitellius, the Governor of Syria. Artabanus fled without striking a blow, but the
absence of any coins apparently struck by Tiridates makes it most probable that his rule was
either very short or very incomplete. It is probable that in this, as in other cases,2 Tacitus
has somewhat exaggerated the success os the Roman arms. Artabanus was soon recalled by
the nobles, and Tiridates took refuge in Syria. Indeed, at one time a Parthian invasion of
Syria was feared, but was averted by the promptness and decision of Vitellius, who even ex-
torted from Artabanus a profession of homage to the Roman Emperor. Once more, for a
short period, Artabanus was a fugitive, a certain noble named Cinnamus3 being elected in his
place; but the latter prevented a civil war by a voluntary abdication, himself placing the
diadem on his master’s head. At the same date, a.d. 40, the great city of Seleucia, on the
Tigris, revolted against the Parthian rule, and retained an autonomy, of which we possess
numismatic records, for the space of six years.
Artabanus must have died as early as a.d. 40, for we have coins of his successor under
that date. Who that successor was has been disputed. It is certain that a civil war took
place between Vardanes and Goterzes, sons os the late king,4 but it has not been considered
certain who reigned first. The coins appear to contradict the account of Josephus, who main-
tains that Vardanes succeeded, and to confirm that of Tacitus, who interpolates a short first
reign of Gotarzes after the death of Artabanus, i.e. in the year 40-41 a.d. Tacitus further
relates that after a short time, Gotarzes, having been unpopular in Parthia, was compelled to
fly to the friends of his father, the Dahae. Returning with an army of those barbarians, he
met Vardanes in the field, but a battle was avoided by a treaty in which all the concessions
seem to have been on one side. Parthia was left to Vonones, and Goterzes, to avoid all rivalry,
retired into the wilds of Hyrcania. Pie seems, however, shortly to have grown tired of in-
action, or repented of his magnanimity. Vardanes had marched westward, taken Seleucia,
threatened Armenia, and attacked Izates, the powerful Satrap of Gordyene and Atropatene;
and Goterzes took advantage of his absence to make a new effort to gain the Parthian throne.
This time he was completely successful, Vardanes was assassinated while intent on hunting,
apparently in the year 45, and no further resistance was made by his party. But Goterzes
used his success ill; and his tyranny produced a new rival in the person of Meherdates,
another descendant of Phraates, who was patronized by the Emperor Claudius, and actively
supported by Izates. But Meherdates5 had not penetrated far into Parthia when he was
1 Tac. Ann. vi. 31. 2 Josephus, A. J. xx. 3, 1.
3 As in the case of the Roman occupations of Armenia. See Num. Chron. n.s. vol. xii. p 9 sqq.
4 Tacitus seems to say of Goterzes ‘brother,’ Josephus ‘son’ (cf. Tacitus, Ann. xi. 8, and Josephus, A. J. xx. 3, 4). The
coins decide the point. s Tac. Ann. xii. 13.