Seleucid Empire began to dissolve. While the central provinces, Media and northern Babylonia, were conquered by the Parthians, Mesene, Elymais and Persis made themselves independent.
Persis never became a part of the empire of the Arsacids, although her kings recognized their supremacy when they were strong (Strabo xv. 728, 736). From the periplus of the Erythraean Sea 33-37 we learn that their authority extended over the shores of Carmania and the opposite coasts of Arabia. A Persian king, Artaxerxes, who was murdered by his brother Gosithros at the age of 93 years, is mentioned in a fragment of Isidore of Charax (Lucian, Macrobii, 15). Other names occur on their coins, the oldest of which are imitations of Seleucid coins, and were perhaps struck by local dynasts under their supremacy; most of the others show the king’s head with the Persian tiara, and on the reverse a fire-altar with the adoring king before it, a standard (perhaps the famous banner of the smith Kavi, which became the standard of Iran under the Sassanids), and occasionally the figure of Ahuramazda; they were first explained by A. D. Mordtmann in Zeitschrift für Numismatik, iii., iv. and vii.; cf. Grundriss der iranischen Philol. ii. 486 seq. The legends are in Aramaic characters and Persian (Pahlavi) language; among them occur Artaxerxes, Darius (from a dynast of this name the town Darabjird, “town of Darius,” in eastern Persia seems to derive its name), Narses, Tiridates, Manocihr and others, the name Vahuburz seems to be identical with Oborzos, mentioned by Polyaenus vii. 40, who put down a rebellion of 3000 settlers (κάτοικοι) in Persis. From the traditions about Ardashir I. we know that at his time there were different petty kingdoms and usurpers in Persis; the principal dynasty is by Tabari called Bāzrangi. The coins demonstrate that Hellenism had become quite extinct in Persis, while the old historical and mythical traditions and the Zoroastrian religion were supreme. There can be no doubt that at this time the true form of Zoroastrianism and the sacred writings were preserved only in Persis, whereas everywhere else (in Parthia, in the Indo-Scythian kingdoms of the east and in the great propagandist movement in Armenia, Syria and Asia Minor, where it developed into Mithraism) it degenerated and was mixed with other cults and ideas. So the revival of Zoroastrianism came from Persis. When Ardashir I. attempted to restore the old empire of Cyrus and Darius, and in 212 A.D. rose against the Parthian king, Artabanus, his aim was religious as well as political. The new Sassanid Empire which he founded enforced the restored religion of Zoroaster (Zarathustra) on the whole of Iran.
The new capital of Persis was Istakhr on the Pulwar, about 9 m. above Persepolis, now Hajjiabād, where even the predecessors of Ardashir I. are said to have resided. It was a great city under the Sassanids, of which some ruins are extant. But it shared the fate of its predecessor; when the empire was founded the Sassanids could no longer remain in Persis but transferred their headquarters to Ctesiphon. (Ed. M.)
PERSIUS, in full Aulus Persius Flaccus (A.D. 34–62),
Roman poet and satirist. According to the Life contained in
the MSS., Persius was a native of Volaterrae, of good stock on
both parents’ side. When six years old he lost his father, and
his step-father died in a few years. At the age of twelve Persius came to Rome, where he was taught by Remmius Palaemon and
the rhetor Verginius Flavus. Four years later began a close intimacy
with the Stoic Comutus. In this philosopher’s pupil Lucan, Persius found a generous admirer of all he wrote. Still
in early youth he became the friend of the lyric poet Caesius
Bassus, whilst with Thrasea Paetus (whose wife Arria was a
relative) he had a close friendship of ten years’ duration and
shared some travels. Seneca he met later, and was not attracted
by his genius. In his boyhood Persius wrote a tragedy dealing
with an episode of Roman history, and a work, the title of which
is rendered uncertain by corruption in our MSS. Pithou’s
generally accepted reading makes the subject that of travel;
the excursions with Thrasea however must have taken place after
boyhood. The perusal of Lucilius revealed to Persius his
vocation, and he set to work upon a book of satires. But he
wrote seldom and slowly, a premature death (uitio stamachi)
prevented the completion of his task. He is described as
possessed of a gentle disposition, girlish modesty and personal
beauty, and living a life of exemplary devotion towards his
mother Fulvia Sisenna, his sister and his aunt. To his mother
and sister he left a considerable fortune. Cornutus suppressed
all his work except the book of satires in which he made some
slight alterations and then handed it over to Bassus for editing.
It proved an immediate success.
The scholia add a few details—on what authority is, as generally with such sources, very doubtful. The Life itself, though not free from the suspicion of interpolation and undoubtedly corrupt and disordered in places, is probably trustworthy. The MSS. say it came from the commentary of Valerius Probus, no doubt a learned edition of Persius like those of Virgil and Horace by this same famous “grammarian” of Berytus, the poet’s contemporary. The only case in which it seems to conflict with the Satires themselves is in its statement as to the death of Persius’s father. The declaiming of a suasoria in his presence (Sat. 3, 4 sqq.) implies a more mature age than that of six in the performer. But pater might here mean “step-father,” or Persius may have forgotten his own autobiography, may be simply reproducing one of his models. The mere fact that the Life and the Satires agree so closely does not of course prove the authenticity of the former. One of the points of harmony is, however, too subtle for us to believe that a forger evolved it from the works of Persius. It requires indeed a thoughtful reading of the Life before we realize how distinct is the impression it gives of a “bookish” youth, who has never strayed far, at least in spirit, from the domestic hearth and his women-folk. And of course this is notoriously the picture drawn by the Satires. So much better does Persius know his books than the world that he draws the names of his characters from Horace. A keen observer of what occurs within his narrow horizon, he cannot but discern the seamy side of life (cf. e.g. such hints as Sat. iii. 110), he shows, however, none of Juvenal’s undue stress on unsavoury detail or Horace’s easy-going acceptance of human weaknesses. The sensitive, home-bred nature of Persius shows itself perhaps also in his frequent references to ridicule, whether of great men by street gamins or of the cultured by Philistines.
The chief interest of Persius’s work lies in its relation to Roman satire, in its interpretation of Roman Stoicism, and in its use of the Roman tongue. The influence of Horace on Persius can, in spite of the silence of the Life, hardly have been less than that of Lucilius. Not only characters, as noted above, but whole phrases, thoughts and situations come direct from him. The resemblance only emphasizes the difference between the caricaturist of Stoicism and its preacher. Persius strikes the highest note that Roman satire reached; in earnestness and moral purpose rising far superior to the political rancour or good natured persiflage of his predecessors and the rhetorical indignation of Juvenal, he seems a forerunner of the great Christian Apologists. From him we learn a lesson Seneca never taught, how that wonderful philosophy could work on minds that still preserved the depth and purity of the old Roman gravitas. When the Life speaks of Seneca’s genius as not attracting Persius, it presumably refers to Seneca the philosopher. Some of the parallel passages in the works of the two are very close, and hardly admit of explanation by assuming the use of a common source. With Seneca, Persius censures the style of the day, and imitates it. Indeed in some of its worst failings, straining of expression, excess of detail, exaggeration, he outbids Seneca, whilst the obscurity, which makes his little book of not seven hundred lines so difficult to read and is in no way due to great depth of thought, compares very ill with the terse clearness of the Epistolae morales. A curious contrast to this tendency is presented by his free use of “popular” words. As of Plato, so of Persius we hear that he emulated Sophron; the authority is a late one (Lydus, De mag. 1. 41), but we can at least recognize in the scene that opens Sat. 3. kinship with such work as Theocritus’ Adoniazusae and the Mimes of Herodas.
Persius’s satires are composed in hexameters, except for the scazens of the short prologue above referred to, in which he half ironically asserts that he writes to earn his bread, not because he is inspired. The first satire censures the literary tastes of the day as a reflection of the decadence of the national morals. The theme of Seneca’s 114th letter is similar. The description of the recitator and the literary twaddlers after dinner is vividly natural, but an interesting passage which cites specimens of smooth versification
