84 66 BEHAVIOUR OF GALERIUS TO HIS CAPTIVES. 971 CHAP. XIII. most part fatal to a Persian army. "Their horses were tied, and "generally shackled, to prevent their running away; and if an alarm happened, a Persian had his housing to fix, his horse to bridle, and "his corselet to put on, before he could mount. On this occasion the impetuous attack of Galerius spread disorder and dismay over the camp of the barbarians. A slight resistance was followed by a dreadful carnage, and, in the general confusion, the wounded monarch (for Narses commanded his armies in person) fled towards the deserts of Media. His sumptuous tents, and those of his satraps, afforded an immense booty to the conqueror; and an incident is mentioned which proves the rustic but martial ignorance of the legions in the elegant superfluities of life. A bag of shining leather, filled with pearls, fell into the hands of a private soldier; he carefully preserved the bag, but he threw away its contents, judging that whatever was of no use could not possibly be of any value. 72 The principal loss of Narses was of a much more affecting nature. Several of his and behaviour to his royal captives. wives, his sisters, and children, who had attended the army, were made captives in the defeat. But though the character of Galerius had in general very little affinity with that of Alexander, he imitated, after his victory, the amiable behaviour of the Macedonian towards the family of Darius. The wives and children of Narses were protected from violence and rapine, conveyed to a place of safety, and treated with every mark of respect and tenderness that was due from a generous enemy to their age, their sex, and their royal dignity.73 for peace. While the East anxiously expected the decision of this great Negotiation contest, the emperor Diocletian, having assembled in Syria a strong army of observation, displayed from a distance the resources of the Roman power, and reserved himself for any future emergency of the war. On the intelligence of the victory he condescended to advance towards the frontier, with a view of moderating, by his presence and counsels, the pride of Galerius. The interview of the Roman princes at Nisibis was accompanied with every expression of respect on one side, and of esteem on the other. It was in that city that they soon afterwards gave audience to the ambassador of the Great King. The power, or at least the spirit, of Narses 74 71 Xenophon's Anabasis, 1. iii. [c. 4, § 35.] For that reason the Persian cavalry encamped sixty stadia from the enemy. 72 The story is told by Ammianus, 1. xxii. Instead of saccum some read scutum. 73 The Persians confessed the Roman superiority in morals as well as in arms. Eutrop. ix. 24. But this respect and gratitude of enemies is very seldom to be found in their own accounts. 74 The account of the negotiation is taken from the fragments of Peter the Patrician, in the Excerpta Legationum published in the Byzantine Collection. Peter lived under Justinian; but it is very evident, by the nature of his materials, that they are drawn from the most authentic and respectable writers. arms. Speech of ambassador. had been broken by his last defeat; and he considered an immediate peace as the only means that could stop the progress of the Roman He despatched Apharban, a servant who possessed his favour and confidence, with a commission to negotiate a treaty, or rather to receive whatever conditions the conqueror should impose. Apharban opened the conference by expressing his master's gratitude for the generous treatment of his family, and by soliciting the Persian the liberty of those illustrious captives. He celebrated the valour of Galerius, without degrading the reputation of Narses, and thought it no dishonour to confess the superiority of the victorious Cæsar over a monarch who had surpassed in glory all the princes of his race. Notwithstanding the justice of the Persian cause, he was empowered to submit the present differences to the decision of the emperors themselves; convinced as he was that, in the midst of prosperity, they would not be unmindful of the vicissitudes of fortune. Apharban concluded his discourse in the style of Eastern allegory, by observing that the Roman and Persian monarchies were the two eyes of the world, which would remain imperfect and mutilated if either of them should be put out. 66 Answer of "It well becomes the Persians," replied Galerius, with a transport of fury which seemed to convulse his whole frame, "it well "becomes the Persians to expatiate on the vicissitudes of for- Galerius. "tune, and calmly to read us lectures on the virtues of moderation. Let "them remember their own moderation towards the unhappy Valerian. "They vanquished him by fraud, they treated him with indignity. They detained him till the last moment of his life in shameful "captivity, and after his death they exposed his body to perpetual ignominy." Softening, however, his tone, Galerius insinuated to the ambassador that it had never been the practice of the Romans to trample on a prostrate enemy; and that, on this occasion, they should consult their own dignity rather than the Persian merit. He dismissed Apharban with a hope that Narses would soon be informed on what conditions he might obtain, from the clemency of the emperors, a lasting peace and the restoration of his wives and children. In this conference we may discover the fierce passions of Galerius, as well as his deference to the superior wisdom and authority of Diocletian. The ambition of the former grasped at the conquest of the East, and had proposed to reduce Persia Moderation into the state of a province. The prudence of the latter, of Diocletian. who adhered to the moderate policy of Augustus and the Antonines, embraced the favourable opportunity of terminating a successful war by an honourable and advantageous peace.75 75 Adeo victor (says Aurelius [de Cæsar. c. 39]) ut ni Valerius, cujus nutu omnia gerebantur, abnuisset, Romani fasces in provinciam novam ferrentur. Verum pars terrarum tamen nobis utilior quæsita. 86 Conclusion, TREATY OF PEACE WITH PERSIA. CHAP. XIII. In pursuance of their promise, the emperors soon afterwards appointed Sicorius Probus, one of their secretaries, to acquaint the Persian court with their final resolution. As the minister of peace, he was received with every mark of politeness and friendship; but, under the pretence of allowing him the necessary repose after so long a journey, the audience of Probus was deferred from day to day, and he attended the slow motions of the king, till at length he was admitted to his presence, near the river Asprudus, in Media. The secret motive of Narses in this delay had been to collect such a military force as might enable him, though sincerely desirous of peace, to negotiate with the greater weight and dignity. Three persons only assisted at this important conference, the minister Apharban, the præfect of the guards, and an officer who had commanded on the Armenian frontier.76 The first condition proposed by the ambassador is not at present of a very intelligible nature; that the city of Nisibis might be established for the place of mutual exchange, or, as we should formerly have termed it, for the staple of trade, between the two empires. There is no difficulty in conceiving the intention of the Roman princes to improve their revenue by some restraints upon commerce; but as Nisibis was situated within their own dominions, and as they were masters both of the imports and exports, it should seem that such restraints were the objects of an internal law, rather than of a foreign treaty. To render them more effectual, some stipulations were probably required on the side of the king of Persia, which appeared so very repugnant either to his interest or to his dignity that Narses could not be persuaded to subscribe them. As this was the only article to which he refused his consent, it was no longer insisted on; and the emperors either suffered the trade to flow in its natural channels, or contented themselves with such restrictions as it depended on their own authority to establish. As soon as this difficulty was removed a solemn peace was concluded and ratified between the two nations. The conof the treaty. ditions of a treaty so glorious to the empire, and so necessary to Persia, may deserve a more peculiar attention, as the history of Rome presents very few transactions of a similar nature; most of her wars having either been terminated by absolute conquest, or The Aboras waged against barbarians ignorant of the use of letters. fixed as the I. The Aboras, or, as it is called by Xenophon, the Araxes, was fixed as the boundary between the two mo and articles limits be tween the empires. 76 He had been governor of Sumium" (Pet. Patricius in Excerpt. Legat. p. 30) [ed. Paris; p. 21, ed. Ven.; p. 135, ed. Bonn]. This province seems to be mentioned by Moses of Chorene (Geograph. p. 360), and lay to the east of Mount Ararat. a The Siounikh of the Armenian writers. St. Martin, Mém. sur l'Arménie, i. 142. -M. five pro narchies. That river, which rose near the Tigris, was increased, a few miles below Nisibis, by the little stream of the Mygdonius, passed under the walls of Singara, and fell into the Euphrates at Circesium, a frontier town, which, by the care of Diocletian, was very strongly fortified.78 Mesopotamia, the object of so many wars, was ceded to the empire; and the Persians, by this treaty, renounced all pretensions to that great province. II. They relinquished to the Cession of Romans five provinces beyond the Tigris." Their situa- vinces tion formed a very useful barrier, and their natural strength Tigris. was soon improved by art and military skill. Four of these, to the north of the river, were districts of obscure fame and inconsiderable extent-Intiline, Zabdicene, Arzanene, and Moxoene; b but on the east of the Tigris the empire acquired the large and mountainous territory of Carduene, the ancient seat of the Carduchians, who preserved for many ages their manly freedom in the heart of the despotic monarchies of Asia. The ten thousand Greeks traversed beyond the 77 By an error of the geographer Ptolemy, the position of Singara is removed from the Aboras to the Tigris, which may have produced the mistake of Peter in assigning the latter river for the boundary instead of the former. The line of the Roman frontier traversed, but never followed, the course of the Tigris.“ 78 Procopius de Edificiis, 1. ii. c. 6. 79 Three of the provinces, Zabdicene, Arzanene, and Carduene, are allowed on all sides. But instead of the other two, Peter (in Excerpt. Leg. p. 30) inserts Rehimene and Sophene. I have preferred Ammianus (1. xxv. 7), because it might be proved that Sophene was never in the hands of the Persians, either before the reign of Diocletian or after that of Jovian. For want of correct maps, like those of M. d'Anville, almost all the moderns, with Tillemont and Valesius at their head, have imagined that it was in respect to Persia, and not to Rome, that the five provinces were situate beyond the Tigris. a There are here several errors. The course of the Aboras, or Aborrhas, the Araxes of Xenophon (Anab. i. 4, § 19), more usually called Chaboras, the Habor or Chebar of the Samaritan captivity, and the modern Khabur, has been traced for the first time by Mr. Layard. It does not rise near the Tigris, but far to the west, in the direction of Harran, at a place called Ras-al-Ain (the head of the spring). From thence it flows in a general southeasterly direction to the hill Koukab, where it receives the Mygdonius, now called Jerujer, upon which Nisibis was situated, and which rises near the Tigris. After its union with the Mygdonius, the Chaboras flows in a southerly direction and falls into the Euphrates at Circesium, the Carchemish of the Old Testament, now called Karkeseea, or Abou Psera. Singara, the modern Sinjar, is not upon the Chaboras, nor indeed upon any river. It lies between Mosul and the Chaboras, at the foot of the Sinjar hill, a solitary ridge rising abruptly in the midst of the desert. See Layard, Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon, p. 234, seq.-S. b See St. Martin, note on Le Beau, vol. i. p. 380. He would read, for Intiline, Ingeleme, the name of a small province of Armenia near the sources of the Tigris, mentioned by St. Epiphanius (Hæres. 60): for the unknown name Arzacene, with Gibbon, Arzanene. These provinces do not appear to have made an integral part of the Roman empire; Roman garrisons replaced those of Persia, but the sovereignty remained in the hands of the feudatory princes of Armenia. A prince of Carduene, ally or dependent on the empire, with the Roman name of Jovianus, occurs in the reign of Julian.-M. Moxoene, called Mogkh by the Armenians, and now Mukus, a district south of the lake Wan, from which it was separated by high mountains. See Layard, Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon, p. 415-417.-S. 88 Armenia. ARTICLES OF TREATY WITH PERSIA. CHAP. XIII. 80 their country after a painful march, or rather engagement, of seven days; and it is confessed by their leader, in his incomparable relation of the retreat, that they suffered more from the arrows of the Carduchians than from the power of the Great King. Their posterity, the Curds, with very little alteration either of name or manners, acknowledged the nominal sovereignty of the Turkish sultan. III. It is almost needless to observe that Tiridates, the faithful ally of Rome, was restored to the throne of his fathers, and that the rights of the Imperial supremacy were fully asserted and secured. The limits of Armenia were extended as far as the fortress of Sintha in Media, and this increase of dominion was not so much an act of liberality as of justice. Of the provinces already mentioned beyond the Tigris, the four first had been dismembered by the Parthians from the crown of Armenia; and when the Romans acquired the possession of them, they stipulated, at the expense of the usurpers, an ample compensation, which invested their ally with the extensive and fertile country of Atropatene. Its principal city, in the same situation perhaps as the modern Tauris, was frequently honoured with the residence of Tiridates; and as it sometimes bore the name of Ecbatana, he imitated, in the buildings and fortifications, the splendid capital of the Medes. 82 IV. Iberia. The country of Iberia was barren, its inhabitants rude and savage. But they were accustomed to the use of arms, and they separated from the empire barbarians much fiercer and more formidable than themselves. The narrow defiles of Mount Caucasus were in their hands, and it was in their choice either to admit or to exclude the wandering tribes of Sarmatia, whenever a rapacious spirit urged them to penetrate into the richer climates of the South.83 The nomination of the kings of Iberia, which was resigned by the Persian monarch to the emperors, contributed to the strength and security of the Roman power in Asia.84 The East enjoyed a profound tran 80 Xenophon's Anabasis, 1. iv. [c. 3 init.] Their bows were three cubits in length, their arrows two; they rolled down stones that were each a waggon-load. The Greeks found a great many villages in that rude country. 8 According to Eutropius (vi. 9, as the text is represented by the best MSS.), the city of Tigranocerta was in Arzanene. The names and situation of the other three may be faintly traced. 82 Compare Herodotus, 1. i. c. 98, with Moses Chorenens. Hist. Armen. 1. ii. c. 84, and the map of Armenia given by his editors. 83 Hiberi, locorum potentes, Caspiâ viâ Sarmatam in Armenios raptim effundunt. Tacit. Annal. vi. 33. See Strabon. Geograph. 1. xi. p. 500. 84 Peter Patricius (in Excerpt. Leg. p. 30 [ed. Paris; p. 21, ed. Ven.; p. 135, ed. Bonn]) is the only writer who mentions the Iberian article of the treaty. "I travelled through this country in 1810, and should judge, from what I have read and seen of its inhabitants, that they have remained unchanged in their appear ance and character for more than twenty centuries. Malcolm, note to Hist. of Persia, vol. i. p. 82.-M. |