Scanned text contains errors.
1128
TJGRANES.
verting his retreat into a disorderly flight (Plut. Lucull. 22—25 ; Appian, Mithr. 84). But notwithstanding this reverse, the mighty host which he was soon able to gather around his standard, inspired him again with the same overweening confidence, and he hastened to attack Lucullus in order to avert the fall of Tigranocerta. The event was decisive ; the army of the Armenian king, though amounting according to the most authentic statement, to 55,000 horse and 150,000 regular infantry, besides light-armed troops, was totally routed by the small force under Lucullus ; the king himself fled almost unattended from the field, and Tigranocerta was surrendered to the victorious general. (Plut. Lucull. 26—28 ; Appian, Mitlir. 85, 86 ; Memnon, 56 ; Liv. Epit. xcviii.; Eutrop. vi. 9 ; Oros. vi. 3.)
During the ensuing winter, while Lucullus was established in Gordyene, several of the neighbouring princes hastened to throw off the yoke of the Armenian king, and tender their submission to the Roman general. Among others, Antiochus (surnamed Asiaticus), the son of Antiochus Eu-sebes, presented himself to claim the throne of his fathers, and was reinstated, apparently without opposition, in the possession of the whole of Syria, where the yoke of Tigranes had long been odious to his Greek subjects (App. Syr. 49 ; Strab. xi. p. 532). Meanwhile Tigranes, in concert with Mithridates (with whom his disasters had brought him into closer relations), was using every exertion to assemble a fresh army, while they both endeavoured, though without success, to induce Phraates, king of Parthia, to make common cause with them (App. Mitlir. 87 ;. Diori Cass. xxxv. 3 ; Epist. Mithr. ap. Sail. Hist. iv. p. 238, ed. Gerlach.). Failing in this they awaited the approach of Lucullus among the bleak highlands of Armenia, where he was not able to penetrate until late in the summer of 68. The two kings met him on the river Arsanias, with an army less numerous, but better disciplined than that of the preceding year, but with equal ill success: they were again totally defeated, and it was only a mutiny among the troops of Lucullus that prevented him from making himself master of Artaxata, the ancient capital of Armenia. But the spirit of disaffection which had by this time pervaded the Roman troops, hampered all the proceedings of their commander ; and though in the ensuing winter Lucullus reduced the strong fortress of Nisibis in Mesopotamia, which was held by Guras, the brother of Tigranes, his subsequent movements were completely paralysed by the disobedience of his own soldiers. The two kings took advantage of this respite, and while Mithridates sought to recover his own dominions, Tigranes regained great part of Armenia, and defeated the Roman lieutenant L. Fannius, whose army was only saved by the arrival of Lucullus himself to his relief (Dioii Cass. xxxv. 4—8 ; Plut. Lucull. 31—34). In the following year, also (b.c. 67), he was able to pour his troops into the provinces of Armenia Minor and Cappadocia without opposition, and Lucullus was unable to punish his audacity. (Dion Cass. xxxv. 14—15.)
The arrival of Pompey (b. c. 66) soon changed the face of events, and Mithridates, after repeated defeats, was again compelled to seek a refuge in Armenia. Meanwhile, a new enemy had arisen to the Armenian king in his own son Tigranes, who, having engaged in a conspiracy against the life of
his father, and finding himself detected, fled for refuge to the Parthian king, Phraates. That monarch, who had recently concluded a treaty of alliance with Pompey, readily lent his support to the fugitive prince, and invaded Armenia with a large army, with which he advanced as far as Artaxata. But he was unable to reduce that city, and as soon as the Parthian king withdrew, Tigranes easily drove out his rebel son. It was at this juncture that Mithridates, after his final defeat by Pompe}7, once more threw himself upon the support of his son-in-law: but Tigranes, who suspected him of abetting the designs of his son, refused to receive him, and even set a price upon his head, while he himself hastened to make overtures of submission to Pompey. That general had already advanced into the heart of Armenia, and was approaching Artaxata itself, under the guidance of the young Tigranes, when the old king repaired in person to the Roman camp, and presenting himself as a suppliant before Pompey, laid his tiara at his feet. By this act of humiliation he at once conciliated the favour of the conqueror, who treated him in a friendly manner, and left him in possession of Armenia Proper with the title of king, depriving him only of the provinces of Sopherie and Gordvene, which he erected into a separate kingdom for his son Tigranes. The elder monarch was so overjoyed at obtaining these unexpectedly favourable terms, that he not only paid the sum of 6000 talents demanded by Pompey, but added a large sum as a donation to his army, and continued ever after the steadfast friend of the Roman general (Dion Cass. xxxyi. 33—36 ; Plut. Pomp. 32, 33 ; Appian, Mithr. 104, 105, Syr. 49 ; Veil. Pat. ii. 37). He soon reaped the advantage of this fidelity, as in B. c. 65 Pompey, on his return from the campaign against Oroeses, finding that the Parthian king Phraates had wrongfully occupied the province of Gordyene, sent his lieutenant Afranius to expel him, and restored the possession of it to Tigranes. (Dion Cass. xxxvii. 5.)
The next year (b.c. 64) we find him again at war with the king of Parthia, but after several engagements with alternations of success, their differences were arranged by the mediation of Pompey, and the two monarchs concluded a treaty of peace (Dion Cass. xxxvii. 6, 7; App. Mithr. 106). This is the last event recorded to us of the reign of Tigranes: the exact date of his death is unknown, but we find him incidentally mentioned by Cicero {pro Sext. 27) as still alive and reigning in the spring of b. c. 56, while we know that he was succeeded by his son Artavasdes before the expedition of Crassus against the Parthians in b. c. 54 (Dion Cass. xl. 16). His death must therefore have occurred in this interval.
The character of Tigranes seems to have in no respect differed from that of many other Eastern despots. It was marked by the most extravagant pride and overweening confidence in prosperity, as well as by the most abject humiliation in misfortune. He alienated not only his Greek subjects and dependent princes by his violent and arbitrary acts, but extended his cruelties even to his own family. Of his sons by the daughter of Mithridates, he put to death two upon various charges, while the civil wars in which he was engaged with the third have been already mentioned. Yet he seems not to have been altogether without a tincture of Greek cultivation ; for we learn that he
