The Hellenistic and Parthian periods

Question 1

The Hellenistic and Parthian periods

Answer 1

• Between 334 and 330 bc Alexander completed the conquest of the whole Achaemenian Empire. (For the story of the conquest, see Alexander the Great and ancient Greek civilization: Alexander the Great.) Alexander’s burning of the royal palace at Persepolis in 330 symbolized the passing of the old order and the introduction of Greek civilization into western Asia.
• Alexander left no heir. His death in 323 bc signaled the beginning of a period of prolonged internecine warfare among the Macedonian generals for control of his enormous empire.
• In the struggle for power after Alexander’s death, Seleucus I brought under his control the whole eastern part of Alexander’s empire. But even before he had consolidated his control over this territory, the eastern provinces on the Indian frontier had begun to revolt.
• Soon afterward (c. 290–280 bc) the two eastern provinces of Margiana and Aria suffered an invasion by nomads. But the invasion was repelled, and the nomads were pushed back beyond the Jaxartes.
• Seleucus I and his successors hoped to Hellenize Asia and held the conviction that the Greeks and Macedonians were a superior people and the bearers of a superior civilization.

Question 2

note

Answer 2

• The victories of Alexander had brought the Greeks to the limits of the known world. But less than a century after Alexander’s death there began a great movement back, propelled by stirring peoples in the Iranian world. In a movement westward from the 3rd century bc, the Sarmatians occupied the northern shore of the Black Sea.
• The empire of the Seleucids, like that of the Achaemenids before them, was shaken by revolts of the satraps. The difficult situation in the west and the grave reverses suffered by the royal house accelerated the weakening of the Macedonian kingdom.
• Parthia was the first province to detach itself from the Seleucid empire, just as it had been the first to rise up on the occasion of the accession of Darius the Great.
• Arsaces, who was chief of the Parni (a member tribe of the Dahae confederation) must have begun his struggle against the Seleucids from 247 bc, the year from which the Parthians dated their history.

Question 3

note 2

Answer 3

• The accession of Mithradates I about 171 bc opened a new period in the destinies of the Parthian kingdom, which historians call “phil-Hellenistic” and which lasted until ad 12.
• Parthian military, political, and economic power expanded considerably following the accession of Mithradates I.
• Like his father, Mithradates I, Phraates II (reigned c. 138–128 bc) was to remain for some time in the eastern provinces. He also endured a last Macedonian attempt to break the Parthian advance.
• The reign of Mithradates II, from 123 to 88 bc, constitutes the most glorious chapter of Parthian history. It put an end to the ambitions of Artabanus’s son Himerus, left by his father as governor of Mesopotamia, and brought Hyspaosines, king of Mesene (Characene), who had extended his possessions too far toward the north, back into submission.
• In 69 bc the Roman general Lucius Licinius Lucullus, in charge of looking after Roman interests in the East, attempted to lure Phraates III into an alliance that would help Rome in its struggle against Pontus and Armenia, but the Parthian king, while still maintaining “friendly” relations with Rome, retained his neutrality.

Question 4

note 3

Answer 4

• The new stage in the phil-Hellenistic period began about 31 bc, when, after his victory over Mark Antony, Octavian (now Caesar Augustus) was the sole master in Rome.
• A new and important period in Parthian history, often called “anti-Hellenistic,” embraces a century and a half, from ad 12 to 162. It is characterized by an expansion of the native Parthian culture and an opposition to all things foreign.
• The period from 51 to 122 is one in which the Parthian state slowly dissolved and decomposed into several small countries, and various parties lay claim to the throne—an inevitable result of the weakness of the central power.
• The 40 years’ peace was succeeded by almost uninterrupted hostilities with Rome, with varied success; Parthia was more vulnerable because of the exposed position of its capital.