Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 3 (of 3)Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
History
Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 3 (of 3)
Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
Rome -- History
In Asia, the Bithynian monarchy had been broken up, the last king,
Nicomedes, having left his realms by will to the Romans. Mithridates had
in Western Asia, Pontus and part of Cappadocia; and on the shores of the
Black Sea, his dominions were still wider: the north of Armenia, the
country north of Erzerum, Georgia (Iberia), Imeritia (Colchis),
Daghestan, and also the peoples south of the Cuban were tributary to
him; the Bosporus and the Greek towns in the Crimea were to all intents
and purposes provinces of his empire; his influence was even felt as far
as the Dniester, on the banks of which his supremacy was acknowledged,
and his connexions moreover reached beyond the Danube into Thrace, even
to the Roman frontier. The kingdom of the Seleucidæ had quite fallen to
pieces, the disputes about the succession, after the death of Demetrius,
having split the country into a number of small principalities which
carried on feuds against each other with great fury: at last, Antiochus,
a petty prince on the coast who could hardly keep his ground, applies in
vain for help to the Romans. The other districts, longing for peace, are
glad to acknowledge Tigranes as their king, who rules from the frontier
of Erzerum as far as Cœle-Syria, over Great Armenia, Mesopotamia,
Northern Syria, Hyrcania, Kurdistan, and part of Cilicia: his empire
yielded him very rich revenues. In the East, it bordered on the
Parthians, who possessed nearly the whole of modern Persia and
Babylonia; in Eastern Persia and part of Khorassan, the kings of Bactria
may at that time have been still in existence, unless the Scythians had
already conquered these countries. Media also did not perhaps belong to
the Parthians even quite down to the breaking out of Pompey’s war.
Indeed their empire was very loosely connected; the Parthian sovereigns
were in the full meaning of the word kings of kings, the provinces being
ruled by their once tributary kings. The towns on the coasts of
Phœnicia, and in Cœle-Syria and Judæa, were free: the princes
(tetrarchs) of Jerusalem, of the race of the Maccabees, were
independent, and even bore the title of kings. In Cœle-Syria, numbers of
such tetrarchies had been formed.
Egypt under the Ptolemies was confined to its narrowest bounds, from the
river of Egypt to Elephantine; yet it was very rich. Its kings had still
a yearly revenue of 12,500 talents, as they were the sole owners of the
land. But the state was exceedingly weak and disorganised, being under
the most wretched and contemptible government. In Asia Minor, the Romans
had of latter years acquired through P. Servilius Isauricus Pisidia,
Lycia, and Pamphylia: these countries had until then been free; the
first, since the war with Antiochus; the two last, since the settlement
of the Rhodian affairs. Part of Cilicia was yet independent, each place
by itself: here were the real nests of pirates. Cyprus was a dependency
of the Ptolemies, but under kings of its own.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account