EMPIRE.] PERSIA 579 the negotiations which Tiribazus astutely opened with the rebel chieftains. No doubt he had to pay a large sum for his liberation. , yptian Meanwhile the war with Egypt was never quite at a ir - standstill. Even before the subjugation of Evagoras much fighting took place, but without result. Our knowledge of the particulars, even of the chronology, is very inexact. After the conquest of Cyprus the war was renewed. The Egyptian king invited the Athenian Chabrias to take the command, but Pharnabazus contrived that the Athenians should recall him (376/375). Pharnabazus, who by this time must have been about seventy years old, was placed at the head of the army which was being mustered at Accho on the Phoenician coast. The Athenian mercenaries were commanded by Iphicrates, who had been sent from Athens. The campaign opened successfully, but dissen sions arose between Iphicrates and Pharnabazus, whose proceedings were much too slow to suit the dashing free lance, for Pharnabazus had to report everything to court and to ask instructions from the same quarter. This, along with other circumstances, saved Egypt once more (374). There is the old story, too, of the difficulties of the wars of this period a mutiny amongst the mercenaries for arrears of pay. The third of the great Athenian condottieri, Timotheus, son of Conon, who fought in the king s service against Egypt in 372, seems also to have been unable to effect anything. evolts The last part of the reign of Artaxerxes II. is filled Asia w ith revolts of the satraps and chiefs of Asia Minor, of mor - which we have numerous but mostly isolated and, to a large extent, inexact accounts. It is impossible to deter mine the connexion of events. We do not even know in all cases whether the same names designate the same persons ; and we are nowhere exactly informed of the motives which induced the individuals to revolt. It is the more difficult to form a judgment on the events because sometimes the same persons side now with, now against the king. These revolts, which lasted in part into the reign of Artaxerxes III., must have weakened immensely the imperial power in the western provinces, and prepared the way for the Macedonians. Rich Greek cities and energetic tyrants probably won for themselves at that time a tolerably independent position. At the head of those who remained faithful to the king we find Autophraclates, satrap of Lydia. He fought the rebels repeatedly. Never theless Diodorus (xv. 90) names him among the rebels ; and it is, after all, possible that there is here no confusion, but that Autophradates was also a rebel for a time. If we omit some smaller risings, such as that of Tachos, who established himself in a fortress on the Ionian coast (after 380), the series begins with Ariobarzanes, successor of Pharnabazus in the Hellespontine satrapy, and no doubt a near relative. Before the beginning of the revolt (about 367) he had formed connexions with Sparta and with Athens, which again stood at the head of a naval confederacy, and he was supported, at least indirectly, by both states. Accordingly, by the diplomatic intervention of Sparta, Autophradates and Mausolus of Caria were in duced to raise the siege of Assus (in the Troad), into which Ariobarzanes had thrown himself. The satrap fell by the treachery of his own son Mithradates into the hands of the royalists and was crucified (probably about 365). x Mausolus (or rather, according to the inscriptions and coins, Maussollos, MaiWwAAos), a native hereditary prince of part of Caria (probably 3 7 5-3 5 1 2 ), had extended his 1 Xen., Cyrop., viii. 8, 4 ; Aristot., Pol., 1312a ; Harpocration, s.v. Apiopap^dvris. He is to be distinguished from Ariobarzanes (about 362-337), ancestor of the kings of Pontus, who, however, seems to have belonged to the same house, and was probably heir to a district on the Propontis. 2 See Pliny, xxxvi. 30, 47. power tolerably far. These Carian potentates, who bore 376-358. the title of satraps, were in point of fact but little depend ent on Persia, and were watched by the Persians with great mistrust. In their cunning and in the sagacity with which they profited by circumstances they recall the Mace donian kings of that period, whom they also resemble in their patronage often perhaps ostentatious of Greek art and manners. Mausolus appears to have once been in open conflict with his suzerain ; but, though nothing de finite is known on the subject, there is no doubt that he came off without serious harm. Datames, satrap of Cappadocia, of Carian race, had ren dered many good services ; in particular he had reduced the nearly independent Paphlagonians once more to sub jection to the great king. 3 But at last he also revolted in league with Ariobarzanes. He was a man of great shrewd ness and versatility, whose stratagems and adventures af forded much entertainment even to later generations. He long kept the king s troops in check, till he was at last treacherously murdered by Mithradates, son of Ariobar zanes, the same Mithradates probably whom we found above betraying his father. The command of the rebel forces was entrusted to Orontes, satrap of Mysia. 4 From the confused accounts it is unfortunately impossible to determine whether he is identical with one or other of the persons of that name who are elsewhere mentioned. Further, we have no clear conception of the position which he occupied in the revolt, nor of the way in which he came to betray his comrades. We read, moreover, of the treachery of a less conspicuous confederate. The rebels had despatched Ptheomithres to Tachos, king of Egypt, who sent them fifty war-ships and much money. Ptheomithres summoned the commanders to a rocky fortress on the northern coast of Ionia, bound them, and delivered them up to the king. In the year 361 Tachos actually assumed the offensive Tachos against the Persians. On his side he had once more f Egypt. Chabrias as leader of mercenaries, and the aged Agesilaus, officially sent by the Spartans, who were bitterly enraged at the Persians because they had now, after the destruc tion of the Spartan power by Epaminondas, recognized the independence of Messenia, though in doing so they only carried out the letter of the peace of Antalcidas. But, when Tachos was engaged in Phoenicia, his nephew Nectanebus set himself up as rival king, and Tachos was obliged to take refuge with the Persians. If the Persians had been still energetic they would have used the oppor tunity, when the legitimate king of Egypt had fled to them and two claimants were struggling for the throne, to subjugate the country. But they did nothing of the kind, even when Chabrias had returned to Athens and Agesilaus had died on the way home (probably 360). At the instigation of Parysatis Artaxerxes had mar- intrigues ried his own daughter Atossa. She used her interest of Ochus. to secure the succession for the energetic and violent Ochus, who is said to have promised to marry her ; the Persian religion approved marriage not only with a sister but also with a daughter, and even with a mother. The elder son Darius was already invested with the succession and the royal title, but having engaged in a conspiracy against his father he was tried and executed, and Ochus, it is said, found means of getting rid of his other brothers, who stood in his way. Soon afterwards the aged Arta xerxes died after a reign of forty-six years (in the course of the year 358). Many stories are told of his mildness 3 The Greek cities on the southern coast of the Euxine, which Xenophon about 400 found quite free, were again subjugated at this time. Datames coined money in Sinope, as did also his (probably indirect) successor Ariarathes. 4 Diod., xv. 91. Mysia is not otherwise known as a satrapy proper. But at any rate Asia Minor was the scene of his exploits.
