king, was a hostage among the Parthians for a number of years.[1] From this time onward Armenia was destined to play a major role in Parthian affairs. Eventually its ruling family became a branch of the royal Arsacid line, and its territory a bone of contention over which Rome and Parthia waged a long and bitter struggle.
The increased political importance of Parthia during the reign of Mithradates II was due in large part to the wealth accruing to her treasuries from the development of overland trade. While this certainly began before the Parthian invasion of Mesopotamia,[2] unification of political control along the whole route from the Roman frontier to the point where the trade was taken over by Chinese merchants proved a tremendous stimulus to business. Our first definite information comes from Chinese sources,[3] which report
- ↑ Strabo xi. 14. 15; Justin xxxviii. 3. 1; cf. Trog. Pomp. xlii, where the war is mentioned.
- ↑ G. M. A. Richter, "Silk in Greece," American Journal of Archaeology, XXXIII (1929), 27–33.
- ↑ A. Wylie, "History of the Heung-noo in Their Relations with China," Journ. Anthropol. Inst., Ill (1874), 401–51, and V (1876), 41–80; Thomas W. Kingsmill, "The Intercourse of China with Eastern Turkestan and the Adjacent Countries in the Second Century b.c.," JRAS, 1882, pp. 74–104; Wylie, "Notes on the Western Regions," Journ. Anthropol. Inst., X (1881), 20–73, and XI (1882), 83–115; Friedrich Hirth, China and the Roman Orient (Shanghai, 1885); Edouard Chavannes, Les mémoires de Se-ma Ts'ien (Paris, 1895–1905), pertinent chapters not published, but see Introduction; Sylvain Lévi and É. Chavannes, "L'Itinéraire d'Ou K'ong," JA, 9. sér., VI (1895), 341–84; Edward Harper Parker, "Chinese Knowledge of Early Persia," Asiatic Quarterly Review, 3d ser., XV (1903), 144–69; O. Franke, Beiträge aus chinesischen Quellen
