Having once again bitten off far more than he can chew, this Intrepid Historian shall now plunge ahead with his audacious plan to tell the history of Persia in a mere three or four diary entries (yeah, the number went up), with apologies for not getting this posted yesterday.
When we ended our last lecturorantical forum, it was 323 BCE, and Iran had recently fallen into Hellenic hands. Alexander the Great lay dead in Babylon, and the squabbling of his underlings quickly rent apart an empire that had been built around his singular personality. The history of the Diadochi (Gr: "successors") is predictably complicated and bloody - they fought four wars amongst themselves between 322-301 BCE - but in the end, only three emerged to claim the lion's shares of the prize. Ruling everything from Babylon east to the Indus, including Persia, was Seleucus...
Hellenism on the March
Sources seem to differ rather widely regarding the rule of the Seleucids, depending - it would appear - on the political bent and national origin of the historian doing the writing (gasp!). Some are glowing:
By 313 BC, Hellenic ideas (disseminated by the conquering Macedonian army's hired philosophers and historians, retired officers, and married inter-racial couples) had begun their almost 250-year expansion into the Near East, Middle East, and Central Asian cultures. It was the (Seleucid) empire's governmental framework to rule by establishing hundreds of cities for trade and occupational purposes. Many cities began, or were induced, to adopt Hellenized philosophic thought, religious sentiments, and politics.
Source: Wikipedia
Some are less so:
The Hellenistic period in Iran began in 331 B.C. and continued until c. 250 B.C. This was the time when the Greeks tried to impose their culture on Asia. During approximately a century and a half of Greek rule in Iran, very little construction took place, and ruins from this period remain few and far between.
Source: Iransaga
Important point: "Hellenic" refers to the culture of Greece - "Land of the Hellenes" - itself, while "Hellenistic" means something more akin to "in the style of the Greeks." Hellenism often melded local artistic traditions with Greek forms to create something quite unique, as the Nike of Samothrace, the Colossus of Rhodes, and the mind-boggling brilliance of Archimedes of Syracuse clearly show, though the Wikipedia article cited above also leaves this caveat:
"Synthesizing Hellenic with native cultures and intellectual trends met with varying degrees of success -- resulting in times of simultaneous peace and rebellion in various parts of the empire."
Regardless of the level of credit accorded he and his heirs, Seleucus does seem to have tried, at least in part, to live up to Alexander's vision of a grand Hellenistic Empire. He married a noblewoman of Iranian origin and had a son by her, thus establishing a dynasty that blended the races of Europe and Asia. His affection for things Asian did not mean that he would actually live in Persia, however, and he was cagey enough to not want to place himself too far from the kingdoms of the other two generals who had snarfed up Alexander's realm. Rather than rule from Persepolis or Pasargadae - too far east - he established the cities of Seleucia in Mesopotamia and Antioch (named after his heir), in Syria, to serve as his capitols. While this move did allow the Seleucids to play a role in the affairs of Egypt, Asia Minor, and eventually northern Greece, it cost them dearly on their eastern flank.
Beware the Parthian Shot
There, the nomadic Parni people, native to the area between the Caspian and Aral Seas, had begun to settle in the satrapy of Parthia, in northeastern Iran. Like many nomads, they were fiercely independent; so much so that, following closely on the heels of the secession of the eastern province of Bactria (northern Afghanistan - and we all know how independent-minded those guys are) in 250 BCE, the Parni led a similar Parthian proclamation of independence. Though the rebel provinces were re-conquered by Antiochus III between 209 and 204 BCE, they had tasted freedom from foreign domination, and it proved difficult for the Mediterranean-obsessed Antiochus to suppress.
Antiochus didn't do himself any favors, either. The ambitious king was not content with fighting to regain what his fathers had lost; he wanted to expand Seleucid influence at the expense of the descendents of the other Diadochi. Initially he was successful: in a series of Syrian Wars which ended in 200 BCE, he wrested Palestine from the Egypt-ruling heirs of Ptolomy, then marched across Asia Minor and, in 196 BCE, over the Hellespont and into Greece itself. He added Thrace to his conquests in 194 BCE.
All roads lead to...
This expansion into Europe put the Seleucids on a collision course with the other rising superpower of the Mediterranean world in the 2nd century BCE, and Rome was all too willing to draw a line in the sand. A Roman army led by Scipio Africanus (he of the defeating-Hannibal-in-the-Second-Punic-War fame) faced off against a much larger Seleucid force commanded by Antiochus himself in 190 BCE, at a place called Magnesia (pronounced Mag-na-see-ah, not the way you're thinking) near the Aegean coast of Turkey. The great Carthaginian general Hannibal, too, was present on the Seleucid side; since his loss at Zama, 12 years prior, he'd basically wandered the Mediterranean, killing Romans when he could and eluding capture when he couldn't.
And though they brought elephants to the party, and camels, and heavy cavalry, and scythe-chariots, Magnesia turned out to be the death-knell for both the Seleucid Empire and the heavy phalanx upon which Greek-styled armies relied. Using fast-moving legions to counter the cumbersome ranks of nearly unmanuverable spearmen, the Romans lost only 300 infantry and 49 cavalry, compared to Seleucid losses of 50,000 infantry, 3000 cavalry, 15 elephants killed, his camp captured and looted, and 1400 taken prisoner. Antiochus was forced to sue for peace, made to pay an enormous indemnity, and obliged to turn over control of Asia Minor to Rome. This last stipulation holds enormous historical significance, for Asia Minor will eventually become the Eastern Empire of Rome, which itself will morph into the Byzantine Empire, which lasts 1000 years past the fall of Rome and spreads religion, culture, and armies over a vast expanse of Europe and Asia. And all because Antiochus brought a hoplite to a gladius fight...
Parthia, where legions go to die
Meanwhile, back east of the Zagros, the Parni took the opportunity to announce the birth of their new Parthian Empire. The Seleucids, now being pursued eastward by the encroaching Romans - always good ones for smelling blood in the water - and with most of their army bleaching in a field north of Ephesus, were unable to do anything about it. They did try, launching invasions on at least three occasions, but with the Maccabees asserting their freedom in the west, Bactrian hassles in the east, and now the Parthians launching arrows from the north, it is little wonder that the Seleucid dynasty came to a rather ignoble end in 64 BCE, when Pompey the Great laid it to rest, once and for all.
The Parthians would remain a check to Roman expansion for the next three centuries, however, and it was the Roman inability to defeat these master horse archers that defined the eastern borders of empire throughout the Pax Romana. The Parthians describe themselves as Hellenophiles on their money, but this should probably be read in the context of being anti-Roman (question: given this, what does "In God We Trust" mean?) and not wanna-be Greek. Starting around 150 BCE with the first Parthian king, Mithridates I, the new royalty sought to establish its descent from the native Achaemenian line of Cyrus the Great. By the end of Mithridates' reign in 138 BCE, the Parthians had essentially reassembled the empire of Cyrus by conquering Media, Fars, Babylonia, and Assyria.
Parthian expansion and their ability to defend their winnings had long-term effects on Iran and the surrounding regions. The Hellenistic, if independence-prone, kingdom of Greco-Bactria was choked off, leaving only fodder for great Rudyard Kipling stories in its wake. The Parthians won control of the Silk Road, and kept their relationship with the Chinese more or less to themselves. Finally, their nomadic roots, fierce independence, and keen sense of when to give battle allowed them to weather occasional defeats - the most important of several Parthian capitols, Ctesiphon (located on the east bank of the Tigris, downstream from Baghdad), fell to the Romans three times in the 2nd century CE alone - and establish what was to become the most stable empire in ancient southwest Asia.
Probably the best example of Parthians taking lemons and making Roman blood is the Battle of Carrhae in 53 BCE. While Caesar was off conquesting Gaul, a rival of his, one Marcus Licinius Crassus (he of the defeated-Spartacus-twenty-years-ago-and-ain't-done-nothin'-since fame), decided that he could bring a little glory unto his name by slicing off a chunk of Parthia for Rome. Big mistake. Vastly outnumbered, the Parthians nevertheless used their 9000 horse archers to devastating effect, showering the Roman legions with a constant barrage of missiles. Archers were kept resupplied by camels laden with no cargo but arrows. When the Romans tried to form a protective "tortoise" shield-wall, the Parthians sent in their 1000 cataphracts - heavy cavalry - to beat up on the tight formations. When the Romans sent out skirmishers, the horse archers would feign retreat, fire a "Parthian shot" over their shoulders, then wheel and fire again when they were once again outside the enemy's range. Crassus himself bought it at Carrhae, as did tens of thousands of legionaries, many pinned to the desert floor by the merciless arrows of the nomads.
Persia proper lay within the domain of the Parthians, but it was administered in the now-traditional satrap-based form of feudalism practiced in this region since Cyrus handed out his first political favor. Like all feudal systems, the Persian satraps had to constantly be wary of the local lords and chieftains who administered the various districts within their satrapy, as the satrap's strength was only as great as the sum of his loyal vassals. Turns out that this general rule applied to the Parthians, too, only they didn't realize it until it was too late.
Sassanids channel Cyrus
In 224 CE, Papak, son of a Zoroastrian priest named Sassan, dethroned Artabatus V, ruler of Persia. As Persia was a vassal state to Parthia, this might have caused little concern in Ctesiphon had the ongoing feudal obligations - the ass-kissing, the tax-paying - been met, but neither Papak nor the son who succeeded him, Adashir, was that sort of man.
The ensuing war was as short as it was bad for Parthia; Ctesiphon fell in 226 CE, and the Sassanids assumed the rulership of the empire. They saw themselves as a culture native to Persia, and like the Parthians before them, sought to legitimize their dynasty by claiming descent from the legendary Achaemenian line of Cyrus and Xerxes. From their own past they grabbed the title "King of Kings," and they established their capitol at Istakhr, near Persepolis. Adashir, especially, recognized the political weapon that faith can be, and he played favorites religion-wise: Zoroastrianism was made the state religion, the Magi were given special privilege, and more than a few marble friezes show Ahuramazda, the supreme deity as spaken by Zarathustra, conferring the authority to rule upon Adashir.
The religious fervor of the Sassanids had, as religious fervors tend to, a darker side. The prophet Muni, who attempted to meld Zoroastrian and Christian beliefs into something both sides could live with, was crucified for his troubles in 276 CE. Run-of-the-pew Christians, also, were persecuted - a situation that became worse after Rome converted to Christianity and its practice in the Sassanid Empire became an act of treason.
Adashir's son Shapur antagonized the hated Romans even further by demanding that they relinquish all their territories in Asia, so that the title "King of all Iran and non-Iran" would fit the new ruler better. He drove home his point by looting Antioch, which provoked a Mesopotamian invasion by the Emperor Gordian III. Gordi got close to Ctesiphon, but died in battle before he could compel a Sassanid surrender; his cowering wimp of a son was gently placed on the throne by a hardball-playing Shapur. A humiliating peace treaty was signed by the Romans, and a bunch of their former legionaries were enslaved and compelled to build the city of Bishapur to commemorate the guy who had beaten them.
The Romans just kept coming, though, as Romans tend to do. In 253 CE, Valerian was named Emperor, and he spent the next seven years flitting about the imperial borders, putting out fires where he could. There were Marcomans in the Alps, Visigoths in Thrace, and Sassanids in Syria, and Valerian tried to deal with them all. Though he liberated Antioch, things did not turn out so well for Emperor Valerian: he was captured by Shapur in 260 CE, and died, never again tasting freedom, two years later.
Shapur was also busy in the east. He expanded into the Kabul river valley, captured Peshawar, and carried the sacred relic - the begging-bowl of the Buddha - back to Istakhr. His son, Shapur II, expanded the empire to the borders of China, then invaded Arabia, all while maintaining a solid western front against the Romans (there was some more drama here, but this is really getting long...).
And then some other stuff happened
The final war between Rome - now reborn as Byzantium - and Persia started when the Sassanid king Khusrau invade Syria and sacked Jerusalem in 614 CE. It is said the Jews welcomed the Persians, remembering the stories of the wise and merciful Cyrus and because the Christians in the city were persecuting them. It is also said that the Sassanids carried back to Persia another sacred relic - the True Cross - as plunder from Jerusalem (don't worry, they give it back in a generation or two). Khusrau took over Egypt and the islands of Cyprus and Rhodes, but the slow-moving Byzantine army finally retaliated in 627 CE, and cut a broad juggernaut-type swath of destruction through Mesopotamia. Weary of being led by a megalomaniac, the Persian army mutinied and murdered Khusrau in 628 CE.
Notice the dates here? Now check your Hegira calendar.
The defeat of the Sassanids at the hands of Byzantium could not have come at a worse time - literally - for native Persian rulers or religions. They had four kings in as many years, and when the last, Yazdgard III, took the throne in 632 CE, he was unable to reunite the Persians in the face of advancing Arab armies, to whom Ctesiphon fell in 636 CE. Islam had been founded far across the deserts of Arabia, and soon it would sweep into a disorganized, anarchic Persia with the force of a well-disciplined sandstorm...