You forgot to mention that it was Parthians who first converted to Christianity, since the ruling class in armenia were Arsacids and were actually iranic Parthians, as well as Gregory the Iluminator also known as Gregory the Pahlav (Parthian) was also from Parthian Suren Pahlav Clan and caucasian albania was controlled by another Parthian clan Mihran Pahlav. And the reason why they converted to Christianity was exactly what you mentioned about Sassanids who were Zoroastrian centric, so the remaining Parthian branches who were opposing Sassanids and who still controlled areas known as armenia and caucasian albania, decided to use popularity of the new religion to remain in power, portraying themselves as protectors of Christianity. Therefore, after the fall of Parthians in Persia to Sassanids they still remained in control of armenia and caucasian albania for the next 400 years. And because of this, I think you haven't completely told the story of Parthians... so no like from me :)
@@ArmadilloArmadaSeconded. This is still a great channel that get people interested and excited about history of all eras and locations, and I have switched to watching purely for enjoying the production value, or watching along with criticisms and my own readings for a while, but it is ultimately in the best interest of this channel and its viewers to improve at least the citation if not overall accuracy. They're just pumpimg out contents way too fast now.
Parthia deserves a series of its own definitely. Also, would be magnificent to see episodes on the Seleucid empire and great Sassanians. Well done, guys, as always!
@@thediamondprincechristian thus, you know/understand nothing of the range combat tactics at all. BTW, Roman legionaries been using it in a variety of ways as well. Do the homework.
I have always found confusing the difference between achaemenid, persian, sassanid, parthian, but now it is so much clearer. Cool to see that nationalistic revolts existed already 2000 years ago.
@@KingsandGeneralsso you mean parthians achaemenid sasanid are all iranian tribes that just ruled the same area or are parthians a separate people? I mean chinese dynasties were mostly han exept jin and qing dynasty. Is it the same circumstance as ming and han dynasty?
parthian, persian, Scythian and medians were 4 tribes of aryans. achamenid were persians+medians ( and later parthians ). Ashkanian ( which didnt mentioned in this video and i donno why ? ) were the pure Scythian + parthian+ medians, and Sassadnid were Persian+median and later parthians :D
Awesome video! Would love to see one covering the Sassanid Empire in the future as well as the rise of Manichaeanism and the religious nature and solidification of Zoroastrianism and its doctrines.
one thing that was not mentioned in the video is that although the Arsacid (ashkanian) dynasty was overthrown by sassanids, many parthian nobles sided with ardashir in the process and these nobles continued to be core parts of sasanid empire as prominent houses. house of mihran was one them and one of its famous figures, bahram choobin, had claims to the sassanid throne through his parthian ancestry.
Yes, the Seven Great Houses. Mihran as you mentioned, plus the Suren, Karen, Varaz, Zik, Ispahbudhan and one other .... And the Arsacids would remain in Armenia for some time after the overthrow of the Parthians, as I recalled.
@@alessandrogini5283could or could not survive? The Parthians? They lost a big battle to the Sassanids in 224 (Hormosdgan), and were driven out of Mesopotamia by Ardashir around 228/228. So Hormosdgan was just 2 years after Alexander secured the throne as sole emperor. Are you suggesting that Alexander Severus, or his mother, Julia Soaemias, should have anticipated the Parthians getting badly beaten by 228 and lend a hand? Say to secure a Parthian client state in Mesopotamia (and maybe Susa and regions near/along the Zagros mountains)? The grandmother, Julia Mamaea had died around 224 so there maybe was a transition period. Then the type of support would have to be selected wisely given elements of the army were acting up (murdering Ulpian at some point, possibly rioted against the citizenry of Rome for three days or so, etc.), and the empire's frontiers were possibly still stretched in terms of commitments.
I feel like the perception of Rome and Parthia being implacable, relentless enemies is somewhat overplayed. People often think of the battle of Carrhae and Antony's campaigns as well as the Roman invasions of the Second Century CE (Trajan, Lucius Verus, Septimius Severus) but they forget that, between Augustus' settlement towards the end of the first century BCE (the one where he supposedly secured the return of Crassus' lost eagle standards) and Trajan's invasion in 113, the Romans and Parthians enjoyed nearly a century of peace with the exception of Corbulo's war in Armenia from 58-63 CE. There was even one source which suggested that a few years later, Vologases I offered Parthian assistance to the Romans in their efforts to put down the Great Jewish Revolt of 67-73 CE. The image of the implacable enemy is far more appropriate for the Sassanians, with whom the Romans were nearly constantly at war. While conflict was certainly a major element of Roman-Parthian relations, their relationship is closer to that of tense rivals (think US and Russia during the Cold War) rather than embittered enemies (such as Rome/Carthage). At least that's my own view of their history. I'm happy to hear other people's perceptions on the topic. The subject of international relations in the ancient/classical world has always been fascinating to me.
Even the Sasanians were not seen as diehard enemies. Justinian spoke well of them and was friends with their ruler, and the house of Sasan which ruled the Sasanians had marriages into powerful eastern and western Roman family’s (as well as the Chinese) It’s less that the Romans and Persians where die hard enemies, and more so they saw each other as one another’s greatest rival, no other was able to reach their level of glory, strength, and sophistication in each others eyes.
Great episode, as an Iranian I always praised parthians they established one of the first congress in the government through the ancient times (the congress was called Mahestan), they were more mithraic than zoroastrian, they never invaded anywhere and just defended their borders
Loved this video, well done. There is very little known about Parthian history, but wanted to point out that the irrigation techniques were there from Achaemenid times originating in the Pars province and adopted by later empires including the Caliphates and the Chinese, it was known as Qanat. A real contribution of Parthians was their Nisaen Horses, who allowed the creation of Cataphracts, since these horses were large and strong enough to allow both themselves and their riders be covered in heavy armor, the Romans started breeding these horses after their defeat in Carrhae, the last recorded Nisaen horse was extinct during 11th century in Constantinople.
Well it's not strange since the Arcasids were descendants of Arcases ( Artaxerses II ) according to Marry Boice, in Parthian manuscripts they called their empire " Shahriarie Pars " which means the Persian Empire " .🔴The Arsacid dynasty of the Parthian empire claimed to derive their lineage from Arsaces/Artaxerxes II, according to Georgius Syncellus (1.539.16f. D.). This claim can be taken seriously, considering the name Artaxšahrakan applied to a royal vineyard mentioned in the Nisa documents (P. Gignoux, Glossaire des inscriptions pehlevies et parthes, Corp. Inscr. Iran., Suppl. Ser. I, London, 1972, p. 46b).
@@czechmeoutbabe1997 It's clearly false. Partizan derives from the Latin word "partis" meaning portion or side. A partisan in one who takes a side, in fact you can say that one is partisan of a cause.
The Parthians beat a few Roman glory hounds and regional governors. Trajan showed the true might of Rome when he invaded and took their capital. They only withdrew because Hadrian didn't think it was worth keeping. Did you not watch the video?
@@Ekaustonian Did YOU watch the video ? Because they clearly said the Parthians retook Mesopotamia Trajan didn't face any formidable Parthian army in his campaign other than a small militia force south of Mesopotamia LOL Plus the Parthian empire was divided in two with one fourth of it, where Trajan raided, being taken by the usurper Osroes I And Trajan lost all territories He only besieged cities in Mesopotamia Mark Antony who had so much experience with Caesar, was a glory hound ? What the emperor at battle of Nisibis 217 ? I never read Romans beating an Iranian army 4 or even 3 times their own army's size They faced smaller Parthian armies most of the times Largest Iranian armies they faced outnumbered them only 2 to 1 at max and that was only few times during the Sassanid era
@@Shahanshah.Shahin Both are different cities Asaak or Arshak city which is probably the real Ashk-Abad, is in Iran, Nesa is in modern day Turkmenistan Nesa, if I'm not mistaken, was an old Sanskrit name, but it was also called Mehrdad Kert (the fort of Mehrdad) and was called Mithradatkert by Greco Romans
achaemenids > sassanids > Parthians These 3 are my favourite persian empire dynasties. I sometimes even prefer sassanids. They improved on almost everything achaemenids and parthians gave them.
Shoutout to Nader Shah for being one of the best military commanders in Iran's history. And especially the Safavids for creating the strongest empire since the Sassanids.
It's kind of incorrect to call the Parthian empire «Persian». While all three are 'Iranian' civilizations, only the Achemenid and Sassanian empires were Persian.
As an Iranian i don’t like these comparisons at all ;in fact there could be no superiority between these three Iranian empires as they rised completely in different conditions and time line and based on differences of contexts the Parthians would gain the greatest honor as they were the true liberators of Iran in hellenistic age,revive Iranian ideology and politics and didn’t surrounded to foreign invaders like their Persian cousins Achaemenids and Sassanids +Parthians were more interested in liberty ,aristocracy and democracy while Sassanids were the most authoritarian and theocratic.
As an Iranian, I personally never put a difference between our ancient kingdoms. But I do respect the Parthians more than Sasanians, for they were the ones to keep the Iranian culture alive. I'd also like to point out that all these various names and ethnicities were Iranian people at the end of the day, it's unfortunate to see others think about a bunch of Mullahs when they hear the word "Iran". The Mullahs are enemies and occupiers of Iran!
@@arabianinferno6918but it’s true that some Parthians whished to witness another Iranian Empire just how they replaced Arsacid Parthians with Sassanid Persians.
they rose by treachery and civil war, had some ups and downs. then unlike Parthians lost to some barbaric foreign power. And doomed Iranians up to this day and age because of Islam. Also the way they conduct religion was far worst. there's ur video :)
Parthia's strongest military force, the Cataphracti, was entirely composed of its aristocratic elite. If they ever lost a battle, then they lost the ruling elite of their empire. For similar reasons the Spartans were very, very reluctant about deploying all of its elite Hoplite infrantry, as they were also their ruling elite.
Parthia had 7 rulling houses, each were in charge of a vast teretory. These houses were consisted of a growing and large family. They mostly wanted to end the fight as soon as possible to go back to their lives. They did experience defeat several times. But they were always ready to defend the homeland against any foreign threat and they always succeed in defending or recapturing after a temporary loss of territory or settlement.
The same thing was true about medieval European knights, Who were btw influenced(indirectly, via Byzantines)of Cataphracts. Did not limited the number of European knights that much, eh?
17:48 I think it's worth mentioning that it wasn't only the 20th century Iranian nationalists who chastised the Parthians for their Hellenophilia, but also the 3th century Persians/Sassanians, who used this as propaganda against them.
@@Ggggggggg631 Persian or not, still Iranian like Persians And the Scythians as mentioned in the video were Iranian people Btw we Mazanis are the descendants of the Parthians and brothers with Persians
@@ramtin5152 Iranian is not the monopoly of Persians who suddenly decided to name themselves Iran 88 years ago 🤦🏻♂️ it is a way broader region than todays Iran
@@Ggggggggg631 Iran is an old word which was used by the Sassanids who called their country Iran or Iranshahr and Parthians named the country the same with an older version of the name, Aryanshahr or Eran
(Before video comment) so excited to see this, many things mention the Persians, but usually as their enemy and I hear they were defeated, yet they prop up throughout a long period of history, so their culture must have been strong to have existed so long through so many defeats, there's very little information about Persian history from their prospective, very excited for this video
You forgot to mention the way they put out Selucid was the first Iranian Revolution after Alexander, they took their land back. Iranians would go and take their land back from Arabs, Mongols in the future. I would love Kings and generals covering that, absolutel epic come backs of Iranians after Alexander, Ghengis Khan & Islam. It is the oldest existing nation state in the world, Sassanians have "Iran" on the coinage and they're still speaking farsi inside Iran so many people don't know how much old and epic Iran is. Their fall is other people's triamph.
Another important point to mention is the eventual Persianization of the conquering peoples. The Greeks,Mongols and Turks all became Iranian after all. And as for Islam, in India for example it arrived as a Turko-Iranic effort rather then an Arab one. While Egypt and the Levant became Arab, Iran remained Iranian despite converting to Islam.
Would you consider making a video (even a short one) on how the Sassanids rose to power and their war of independence against/ overthrow of the two Parthian factions that were currently engaged in civil war?
This video is accurate in that my knowledge of Parthia up to this point has been almost entirely comprised of their antagonism with Rome lol. Thank you for expanding my horizons. I would enjoy more videos on the Parthians in the future! God be with you out there everybody. ✝️ :)
Parthian and the sasanid empire were basically one empire (iran) and these 2 were just different dynasties. The latest studies on ancient iran do label them as just one empire. Thanks for the awesome video as always
The Parthians were nomadic people from the northern areas who conquered most of the Seleucid Empire. The Sasanids were from Southern Iran. They seem like very different people. It's sort of like how the Assyrians and Babylonians controlled much of the same area, but are seen as different empires.
@@greywolf7577 Again, the latest studies do label them as one empire because the structure and organization didn't change much when the transition happened. The sassanids werent as centralized as earlier studies suggested and also relied on the parthian noble houses for suppport. The empire was called Aryanshahr in the parthian language and Eranshahr in Middle Persian and both mean Land of the Aryans/Iranians and Iran is another variation of this empires name.
@@greywolf7577lol, Parthains and Persians are both western middle Iranian people, but most Parthians were still maintaining the nomadic lifestyle , Parth and Pars are two different pronounciation of the Persian term " partava / Parsava" meaning borderland( pahlavi/ pahlava ), parthian and Sassanid Persian are northern and southern branches of Middle Iranian, Parthians literally called their empire " Shahriarie Pars " ( Persian empire) 🔴The Arsacid dynasty of the Parthian empire claimed to derive their lineage from Arsaces/Artaxerxes II, according to Georgius Syncellus (1.539.16f. D.). This claim can be taken seriously, considering the name Artaxšahrakan applied to a royal vineyard mentioned in the Nisa documents (P. Gignoux, Glossaire des inscriptions pehlevies et parthes, Corp. Inscr. Iran., Suppl. Ser. I, London, 1972, p. 46b).
@@MM-dm4xjThe Hellenistic qualities seen in the Parthian empire all but disappeared under the Sassanids. These “new studies” are probably just Iranian nationalists.
I wish they mentioned how the Parthian dynasty that was in Armenia continued on for a while longer than the Parthian dynasty in Persia. Also to Kings and Generals...I think a great video would be something about all these mixed dynasties/countries in the indus river valley. Seeing the indo-greeks, indo-sythians, and indo-parthians was cool and I'd love to see a video about that.
It's funny that history repeat itself. When Parthians comes from region of Parthia between Aral sea and eastern Iran would also the very spot where Oghuz Seljuk clan would established the Great Seljuk Empire that mirroring old Persian empires including Parthian themselves.
thank you for all the great videos . much love from iran . always love to see that us persians are not demonized by west like how they do in media and movies.
Because they either didn't wanted to show the disaster at Carthage, and the Parthian retaliation for Ventidius victories, during Mark Antony's Atropatene campaign which was also a humiliating defeat for Rome ... Or maybe the budget wasn't enough for those great battles
Thank you, Kings and Generals! You guys got me interested in the Parthian Empire now due to its religious tolerance and diversity. Also, is it wrong to say that some Parthian institutions did revive during the time of the Safavid Iran? After all, it did practice religious tolerance and diversity to a certain degree. Heck, one certain Shah even found it out the hard way that forced conversion means no jizya and no jizya means no salaries for his officials and military.
You know that what i love the most about parthia history even when they look down upon their own people (being barbaric) and steppe nomad, they still manage to show them all they more civilized then people in this time believe I just love iranian history
خیلی ممنونم بابت ویدیوی خوبتون ، لطفا درباره دیگر تمدن های باستانی ایران هم ویدیو بسازید ، و لطفا درباره قیام ها و شورش های ایرانیان دربرابر اعراب و مسلمانان هم ویدیو بسازید . ❤️❤️❤️ 🦁☀️
(Long comment) The Parthians are very underrated and underestimated The borders of the Parthian empire, especially the eastern ones, were vaster than that They had control over satrapies of Khwarazm and Bactria Their south eastern borders also reached as far as river Sindh Even until after the three Roman invasions of Mesopotamia Everyone keeps saying that their capital was sacked by Rome and Trajan campaign but they don't know about their victories Before a summary of their victories, you should know that the capital that was sacked was one or two cities away from the eastern borders of Rome It was sacked whenever there wasn't any army there or the empire was in civil war or during the reign of a weak king such as Osroes I (a usurper) Look at the states of the Parthians and the Sassanid when Trajan and Carus attacked Their empire was literally divided in two with the western parts of it being seized by a usurper king called Osroes I (same guy who provoked Trajan to attack) and the east was taken by a Kushan king while the Shahanshah wasn't present during Carus invasion Pre islamic Iranian empires (except Medians) had several capitals around the empire The Parthians had 7 different capitals with 4 or 5 of them being beyond Zagros mountains and outside Mesopotamia The sack of Ctesiphon barely even mattered to them Now back to the Parthian achievements in their battles against Rome : Battle of Carrhae, Romans lost even though they outnumbered the Parthians more than 4-1 (43,000 Romans vs 10,000 Parthians) in open lands and after that, the Parthians plundered the lands of Judea, Syria, and southern Anatolia Few years later after a setback in a skirmish with Cassius and another Roman commander in their first raid, Pacorus forces heavily defeated Lucius Decidius Saxa near Antioch He fled to Cilicia where he was captured and executed by the Parthians His legions reportedly suffered heavy defeats again and several of his aquilae were seized, being returned to Rome first after a brief Roman war against Parthia and negotiations after the disastrous defeats of Mark Antony In Judea, the pro Roman Jewish forces of high priest Hyrcanus II, Phasael, and Herod were defeated by the Parthians as well Mark Antony Atropatene campaign, 32,000-45,000 out of 127,000 Romans were killed by the Parthians who had only 40,000-50,000 soldiers Mark Antony came back for another campaign against the Parthians with the help of a Median king but was again pushed back by the Parthians and also forced to go back to Rome because of his rivalry with Octavian The Parthians also won at the battle of Urumia 36 BC The Parthians were victorious at the battle of Rhandeia and inflicted a heavy defeat on the Romans who were forced to make a bridge for the Parthian king, Walagash I (Vologases I) could victoriously pass the river on his royal elephant's back Even made Romans pass under his soldiers spears, which was the most humiliating thing for Roman legions Trajan attacked when the Parthians were in a civil war (both because of the Parthian usurper king Osroes I who betrayed the treaty of Rhandeia) and still lost all the conquered cities to Iranian rebels after he left Even during Trajan's invasion, the Parthians gained some victories Trajan failed to take Hatra, which avoided a total Parthian defeat and he himself was wounded during the siege The Parthian forces attacked key Roman positions, and Roman garrisons at Seleucia, Nisibis and Edessa were evicted by the local populaces and the Romans were pushed out of Mesopotamia with the defeat of Trajan's puppet king The Parthians may have been defeated at the end of the Roman Parthian war of 161-166 but before that, they defeated and routed two Roman armies in Armenia and Syria and also won at the siege of Edessa 163 The Parthians were also victorious in war of Caracalla Caracalla first chose to preoccupy himself with an invasion of Armenia, which was ruled by the Armenian kings who were chosen from the members of the Arsacid dynasty by the Parthian king himself, so he appointed a freedman named Theocritus as the leader of the invasion, which eventually ended in a disaster for Romans The battle of Nisibis 217 AD was also won by the Parthians and the Roman emperor, Caracalla's successor, was forced to pay a heavy tribute The tribute was 200 million sesterces, worth about US$13.7 billion at November 2021 gold prices That also equals the amount of wealth the richest man of the Roman republic, Crassus, the Roman general at the battle of Carrhae had
I didn't see the part where the Parthians invaded and took Rome, Italy, Anatolia, or even Syria...oh right, the Romans beat the crap out of them when it mattered. The Parthians beat a few glory hounds looking to make a name for themselves in Rome. The Parthians lost when they faced the true might of Rome in Trajan. The Persians never could beat a Western Empire. It took the Turks coming in to accomplish anything notable against the West.
@@Ekaustonian Take a look at where Parthia was and then take a look at how far Italy is When did I say anything about taking ? I said RAID Plundering and leaving, because they had way less soldiers than Romans Trajan didn't face any formidable Parthian army in his campaign other than a small militia Plus the Parthian empire was divided in two with one fourth of it, where Trajan raided, being taken by the usurper Osroes I And Trajan lost all territories He only besieged cities Mark Antony who had so much experience with Caesar, was a glory hound ? I never read Romans beating an Iranian army 4 or even 3 times their own army's size They always faced smaller Parthian armies The only times the Sassanids used Turks was during the siege of Amida and even then most of the work was done by the Sassanids It was Heraclius and his predecessors who had to beg Turks for help against the Sassanids
Because Rome did sack their capital 5 times….. and Parthia couldn’t even get past Anatolia….. Rome also lasted much longer, while Persia had a new empire every hundred years lol
@@Vntihero 1 or 2 out of 7 capitals with the Parthians and later the Sassanids being in civil war during most of those 5 times Plus look how close it was to the eastern borders of Rome You think Rome was their only enemy ? They had to keep an eye on the Kushans, deal with Scythian raids in the north, probably Arab raids in the south and go through civil wars that could last for decades All of this while fighting against Roman invasions The largest Parthian army in HISTORY (which defeated Mark Antony's) had only between 40,000 to 50,000 soldiers Not to mention their previous victories against the superior enemies they had before Romans And yet despite all of this, their empire survived for 471 years
lol I never seen Romans go over two cities while you are wrong Parthia did conquer some roman cities like Romans but I think you are stupid panturk cause you don't know that Persian empires was nonstop beating western empires and funny is that it's all were told by western historians 😂 but only thing ottomans did was defeating already destroyed byzantine empire but in past Persian empires win priceless battles and humiliated romans did you your empire was paying gold so that Parthia don't attack?😂
11:16 Possibly the greatest game on Nintendo Game Cube. It was so random yet fun. I believe it somewhat paved the way for the modern GTA franchise by rockstar. What a throwy back to 2002, I'm glad you brought it up to remind the millennials of a good time gone by; these youngin' and their tiktok just don't know.
But they were Iranian people, that's what matters. Even if they adopted Hellenistic aspects along with Persian aspects, nothing detracts from the truth of their identity and nationality. Alexander also adopted many Persian aspects and was fascinated with Persian culture, but he was still Macedonian (Greek). Anyway, thank you for your efforts, it was just a small parenthesis😅
@@LouisKing995 what the hell are you saying bro? I listened to it, and I won't say anything against it, yes, the Parthians also had interest in greek culture, but the loyalty of them to Iranian and Mithraic culture is an important thing that european "NaTiOnAlIsM" always ignore, that's why we Iranians say these things, it's good for you as well to learn to listen and see the other side of an coin my friend!!!
@@zitka123 Wrong, the Persians never saw Parthians as inferior!! When Mithridates the Great of Parthia defeated the Seleucid army, the Fars province of Iran, which had gained its independence long before the rise of Parthia, was already governed by a small Persian dynasty called the Frataraka. In history, there is no sign of a war between the Parthian dynasty of "Arsacid" and the Persian dynasty of "Frataraka," and according to many historians, such as Dr. Touraj Daryaee, the Persians themselves accepted the rule of the Parthians and had no problem with them. In addition of this, in the Persians perspective never considered any nations inferior, they respected the culture and religion of others and tried to learn from them. What you said, "seeing inferior," is more related to the Greek and Roman point of view, not for Persians.
@@zitka123 May I know where this information of yours comes from? Or what is your claim based on? The Persians were not unfamiliar with nomadic life, because just like the Parthians, they themselves were nomads before building their own great civilization, and even during their civilization, many of them moved from one city to another in a nomadic way. So there was no reason to see the Parthians as inferior because of their nomadic lifestyle, also, as previously mentioned, because of their perspective of respect for others as well, (two important signs). Also, no, you said the Persians helped the Seleucids against the Parthians; no way, that's completely wrong. The Persians wanted their independence much earlier than the Parthians and considered themselves much more separate from the Greeks compared to the Parthians, who accepted many Greek aspects. The Avesta, the book of the Persians, which introduces Alexander as a monster, completely clarifies the Persian view of the Greeks and the Seleucid government in their land. Additionally, the Persian coins of the Frataraka dynasty in the Fars province of Iran, which were non-Greek coins modeled on Zoroastrian and Persian beliefs, further demonstrate this separation. Please think a little more before saying something (with respect).
What are "Simpsons-style hit-and-run tactics" (11:18)? I googled it and got nothing...may also be a misstype in the the CCs, and "Simpsons" is actually something else? Regardless, curious if anyone can shed a little light on this.
Y'know, K&G having such high-quality content really makes their abruptly memetic jokes have a hundred times the impact. I wasn't expecting to hear "Simpsons-style hit-and-run tactics," "Scrooge McDuck," and "financier of the First Triumvirate youtube channel" in the same minute.
Not bad, a good introduction for new people to Parthians. They had their ups and downs, they even lost their capitals. But they have never accepted defeat nor surrendered to their numerous enemies. Parthians were one of the very few in the history of the world, and at least the only one in Iran's 3000 written history, to always overcome their foreign enemies. Even in their decline, even in the last year of their rule, they defeated the Roman Empire, their arch-enemy. Unlike the Achaemenid empire or Sasanids, who were overthrown by Macedonians and barbaric Arabs. Parthians also were a more defensive nation, and they preferred to end the fight soon and go back to their lives. Their number of casualties was always at a minimum. And their armies were so effective. You can check the numbers on battles. For instance, in Carrahe, they defeated the 40-45000 Romans (20k Legionnaires) with a mere 9000. And their casualties were less than a hundred men. Unlike the Sasanid empire which were proud to go to 20-year-long wars, lose thousands, and come back empty-handed to suppress their own people. Also, the Parthians were the only ancient or even modern empire that practiced democracy, when it came to their ruler. Their senate or "Mahestan", was a combined gathering of the 7 ruling families (Vaspooheraan), that decided on who was more qualified to become King of kings. This was more than 2000 years ago. There was no rule that when a father dies, his elder son "should" become the ruler, NO! Maybe his 70-year-old uncle is fit to rule the country the best. As it did happen and thus generated good results. If it weren't for the treacherous Sasanids, they would defend our lands against the barbaric Arabs. as they always did in their 500 years of proud history.
Stopped reading after you said they never accepted defeat or surrendered, I’m pretty the Parthian empire was defeated. Do you know any other battles besides Carrahe? Also in defence of the Romans it couldn’t have been to hard to shoot arrows at someone all day on horse against infantry. The Romans didn’t have a chance, heavy infantry trying to defeat light horse archers on an open field. The Romans also took the Parthian Capital several times (under Trajan, Lucus during Emperor Marcus Aurelius time, Emperor Servius Africanus) so Carrahe was not the end but merely the beginning.
@gelraldoldo5152 The Parthians military achievements against their powerful Greek and Roman foes are very underrated and underestimated They rose from a small kingdom with three cities and few tribes and overcome the Seleucid empire and the Greco Bactrian kingdom Under Arashk I/Arsaces I they lured the imperial army of Seleucus II into Central Asia and decisively defeated the Seleucids, capturing Seleucus in battle During the reign of Mihrdat I/Mehrdad I/Mithridates I the great they reconquered the great Iran, conquered the Greco Bactrian kingdom, repelled a Saka invasion, conquered the Medians, defeated and captured the Seleucid king Demetrius II Nicator in battle around Zagros mountains Under Phraates II the Seleucids launched a military campaign against the Parthians with an army of 80,000 men but the Parthians defeated them again at the battle of Ecbatana 129 BC and killed the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes During the reign of Mihrdat II/Mehrdad II/Mithridates II the great the Parthians under Gotarzes I faced the allied forces of the Seleucid king Antiochus X and Queen Laodice in battle and defeated them as well, killing Antiochus X in the process One of Gotarzes satraps (who was probably his brother or half brother) named Mithridates III attacked the Seleucid army of king Demetrius III Eucaerus in the middle of the desert and almost annihilated it, capturing the king alive Crassus campaign, Roman invasion repelled Battle of Carrhae, Romans lost even though they outnumbered the Parthians more than 4-1 in open lands (43,000 Romans vs 10,000 Parthians) and after that, the Parthians plundered the lands of Judea, Syria and southern Anatolia Armenia also went under the Parthian rule again Few years later, after a previous setback in a series of skirmishes with Cassius and another Roman commander, Pakur/Pacorus forces heavily defeated Lucius Decidius Saxa near Antioch He fled to Cilicia where he was captured and executed by the Parthians His legions reportedly suffered heavy defeats again and several of his aquilae were seized, being returned to Rome first after a brief Roman war against Parthia and negotiations after the disastrous defeats of Mark Antony Pacorus forces also defeated pro Roman Jewish forces of high priest Hyrcanus II, Phasael, and Herod (this is before Ventidius campaign) Second Roman invasion after Ventidius campaign Mark Antony Atropatene campaign, 32,000-45,000 of Antony's army of 127,000 men were killed by the Parthians while the Parthians had only 40,000-50,000 soldiers They also defeated the Romans at the battle of Urumia 36 BC Mark Antony came back for another campaign against the Parthians with the help of a traitor Median king but was again pushed back and forced to go back to Rome because of his rivalry with Octavian while the Parthians and their new Armenian allies defeated his and the Median king's forces and brought Armenia under the Parthian rule again Roman Parthian war 58-63 AD The Parthians were victorious at the battle of Rhandeia and inflicted a heavy defeat on the Roman army They made Romans build a bridge so that the Parthian Shahanshah can pass the river while sitting on his royal elephant Even made Romans go under their spears, which was the most humiliating thing for Roman legions By the end of this war, the Parthians reconquered Armenia again There were 7 Parthian capitals in several different regions of the empire in total and whenever Ctesiphon was sacked, the Romans faced no Parthian army Trajan attacked when the Parthians were in a civil war (both because of the Parthian usurper, Osroes I, who betrayed the treaty of Rhandeia) and still lost all the conquered cities to Iranian rebels in a few months after he left Even during Trajan's invasion, the Parthians gained some victories Trajan failed to take Hatra, which avoided a total Parthian defeat and he himself was wounded during the siege The Parthian forces attacked key Roman positions, and Roman garrisons at Seleucia, Nisibis and Edessa were evicted by the local populaces and the Romans were pushed out of Mesopotamia with the defeat of Trajan's puppet king thus reconquering all the territories that were lost during the invasion and fighting Romans off to a stalemate The Parthians may have been defeated at the end of the Roman Parthian war of 161-166 but before that, they defeated and routed two Roman armies in Armenia and Syria and even successfully besieged Edessa in 163 They might have won in the end if it wasn't for a plague The war of Caracalla Ever since the treaty of Rhandeia, a Parthian prince from Arsacid dynasty picked by the Parthian king himself, would sit on the throne of Armenia but was crowned there by Romans (they became a different branch of the Arsacid dynasty) Caracalla chose to preoccupy himself with an invasion of Armenia He appointed a freedman named Theocritus as the leader of the invasion, which eventually ended in a disaster for Romans who were defeated by the Parthian Armenian rebels and repelled from Armenia After that, the Parthians won the battle of Nisibis 217 AD and the Romans were forced to pay a heavy tribute of 200 million sesterces which equalled the wealth of the richest man of the Roman republic, Crassus, the Roman general at the battle of Carrhae
@@gelraldoldo5152 You can't pay attention. I never said they didn't lose anything. I said they didn't accept it. and they never got conquered! they kept fighting, and took back whatever they lost. check out the other reply for an in depth winning streak of the Parthians ;)
They still exist but as small tribes, most of them choose modern lifestyles so they got out of nomadic tribal life. Those ancient tribes who lived in the satrapy of Parthia in what's called Turkmenistan today were probably relocated into the Iranian heartland by the Caspian sea or khorasan region , some might have gone to extinct by the turkic invaders ,and some might have mixed with them .
If you don’t mind me asking but can you do videos on the Indo Scythian Kingdom, The Indo Parthian Kingdom, The Northern and Western Satraps and The Kushan Empire. The Indo Scythian kingdom was a group of nomadic Iranian people of Scythian origin who migrated from Central Asia southward into the northwestern Indian subcontinent but to be precise the modern day south Asian regions of Afghanistan, Pakistan and northern India and they ruled from 150 Bc to 400ad and they were the first of a group of nomadic peoples known as the sakas. The northern satrap and western satraps were dynasties of Saka Rulers who ruled parts of India with the northern satrap ruling over the area of punjab and Mathura after the decline of the indo Greek kingdom while the western satrap were the rulers of the Western and central parts of India but to be precise the modern day province of Sindh in Pakistan and the Indian states of Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh and the northern satraps ruled from 60 bc to the 2nd century Ce while the western satraps ruled from 35ce to 415ce. The Indo Parthian Kingdom was a Parthian kingdom that ruled an area covering parts of eastern Iran, various parts of Afghanistan and the northwest regions of the Indian subcontinent( most of modern Pakistan and parts of northwestern India) and they belonged to the house of suren which is one of the two Parthian noble families and it ruled from 19ce to 226ce. When the Indo Scythians and Indo Parthian kingdoms along with the northern and western satraps collapsed a new power took over their domains and this new power was the Kushan Empire which was most probably one of the five branches of Yuezhi confederation and the Kushans were an Indo European nomadic people of possible Tocharian origin and they migrated from northwestern China(Xinjiang and Gansu) and settled in ancient Bactria and they had diplomatic contacts with many of the powers at that time like the Roman Empire, The sasanians, The Kingdom of Aksum and The Han Dynasty of China and The Kushan Empire was at the center of trade relations between Rome and China and according to French historian Alain Danielou” for a time the Kushan Empire was the center point of the major civilizations and while much philosophy art and science was created within its borders the only textual record of the history of the empire’s history today comes from inscriptions and accounts in other languages particularly Chinese and the empire was established in the year 30ce and ended in 375ce and the Kushan empire fragmented into semi independent kingdoms in the 3rd century ad and these kingdoms fell to the sasanians who were invading from the west and established the Kushano Sasanian kingdom in the areas of Sogdiana, Bactria and Gandhara but in the 4th century pressure came from the east in the form of the Gupta empire an Indian dynasty however in the year 375 the last of the Kushan and Kushano Sasanian kingdoms were eventually overwhelmed by new invaders from the north and these invaders were the Kidarites aka the Kidara Huns and a group known as The Hephthalites aka The White Huns.
Absolutely would love videos focused on North-Western India(modern day Pakistan). Indo-Greeks,Indo-Scythians,Indo-Parthians,Kushans,Huna are all extremely under rated instead overshadowed by the Islamic invasion from Central Asia but their predecessors are not widely known unfortunately
Achaemenid Empire, Parthian Empire, Sassanid Empire: Three Iranian(Persian) Global Superpower empires which ruled the world for almost 1000 years alongside the Romans and Greeks! 🇮🇷🇮🇷🇮🇷
*K&G* 👋👋 *Can You Guys Please Make a video on the Land of Punt* *These peoples known as the proto-Cushites Have been known as a great civilization by even Egypt itself* *Would love to see how Horn of African Peoples Had managed to become a the centre of Trade between west and east and the later Successor states of Macrobia and the Trading emporiums*
Play War Thunder now with my link, and get a massive, free bonus pack including vehicles, boosters and more: playwt.link/kingsandgenerals2023
Please stop using bce
You forgot to mention that it was Parthians who first converted to Christianity, since the ruling class in armenia were Arsacids and were actually iranic Parthians, as well as Gregory the Iluminator also known as Gregory the Pahlav (Parthian) was also from Parthian Suren Pahlav Clan and caucasian albania was controlled by another Parthian clan Mihran Pahlav. And the reason why they converted to Christianity was exactly what you mentioned about Sassanids who were Zoroastrian centric, so the remaining Parthian branches who were opposing Sassanids and who still controlled areas known as armenia and caucasian albania, decided to use popularity of the new religion to remain in power, portraying themselves as protectors of Christianity. Therefore, after the fall of Parthians in Persia to Sassanids they still remained in control of armenia and caucasian albania for the next 400 years. And because of this, I think you haven't completely told the story of Parthians... so no like from me :)
also the wars between the safavids and ottomans are very interesting
@@ArmadilloArmadaSeconded. This is still a great channel that get people interested and excited about history of all eras and locations, and I have switched to watching purely for enjoying the production value, or watching along with criticisms and my own readings for a while, but it is ultimately in the best interest of this channel and its viewers to improve at least the citation if not overall accuracy. They're just pumpimg out contents way too fast now.
21:07
Parthia deserves a series of its own definitely. Also, would be magnificent to see episodes on the Seleucid empire and great Sassanians. Well done, guys, as always!
Persia will always be superior to r*me
No they don't, they used projectiles to beat Marcus Crassus.
Whats there to talk about, how they were too coward to fight a real war in combat.
@@thediamondprincechristian thus, you know/understand nothing of the range combat tactics at all. BTW, Roman legionaries been using it in a variety of ways as well. Do the homework.
I have always found confusing the difference between achaemenid, persian, sassanid, parthian, but now it is so much clearer. Cool to see that nationalistic revolts existed already 2000 years ago.
I wouldn't call it "nationalistic", but rather "tribal" or "dynastic".
@@KingsandGeneralsso you mean parthians achaemenid sasanid are all iranian tribes that just ruled the same area or are parthians a separate people? I mean chinese dynasties were mostly han exept jin and qing dynasty. Is it the same circumstance as ming and han dynasty?
parthian, persian, Scythian and medians were 4 tribes of aryans. achamenid were persians+medians ( and later parthians ). Ashkanian ( which didnt mentioned in this video and i donno why ? ) were the pure Scythian + parthian+ medians, and Sassadnid were Persian+median and later parthians :D
@@gabbytay some historians classify Parthians as a different, more nomadic Iranian tribe, others as just another dynasty.
@@javadasaadi8430 @kingsandgenerals it is very complicated. Especially in the steppe area. Are Saka and sarmatians aryans too?
Awesome video! Would love to see one covering the Sassanid Empire in the future as well as the rise of Manichaeanism and the religious nature and solidification of Zoroastrianism and its doctrines.
Reviews of Manichaeanism, Mithraism and the Cult of Sol Invictus together, with maps showing their spread over time, would be great to see.
one thing that was not mentioned in the video is that although the Arsacid (ashkanian) dynasty was overthrown by sassanids, many parthian nobles sided with ardashir in the process and these nobles continued to be core parts of sasanid empire as prominent houses. house of mihran was one them and one of its famous figures, bahram choobin, had claims to the sassanid throne through his parthian ancestry.
Yes, the Seven Great Houses. Mihran as you mentioned, plus the Suren, Karen, Varaz, Zik, Ispahbudhan and one other .... And the Arsacids would remain in Armenia for some time after the overthrow of the Parthians, as I recalled.
@@michaeldunne338parthians could had survived if Alexander severus had Better military advisors
@@alessandrogini5283could or could not survive? The Parthians?
They lost a big battle to the Sassanids in 224 (Hormosdgan), and were driven out of Mesopotamia by Ardashir around 228/228. So Hormosdgan was just 2 years after Alexander secured the throne as sole emperor.
Are you suggesting that Alexander Severus, or his mother, Julia Soaemias, should have anticipated the Parthians getting badly beaten by 228 and lend a hand? Say to secure a Parthian client state in Mesopotamia (and maybe Susa and regions near/along the Zagros mountains)?
The grandmother, Julia Mamaea had died around 224 so there maybe was a transition period. Then the type of support would have to be selected wisely given elements of the army were acting up (murdering Ulpian at some point, possibly rioted against the citizenry of Rome for three days or so, etc.), and the empire's frontiers were possibly still stretched in terms of commitments.
In Pahlavi Mithrdat the Mithrban, Mithradates the kind(Mithra blessed)
The Parthians, defeaters of the Seleukids, enemies of the Romans, and defeated by the Sassanids? That's pure suffering!
What a cycle of life empire
Then the Arabs defeated them
only Iranians are Iranians bane ... :(
You speak like Sasanians didn't make Romans shit their pants
hey dont say it like that the Sasanids were also a great empire xD
and they were the descendants of the Achaemenids
I feel like the perception of Rome and Parthia being implacable, relentless enemies is somewhat overplayed. People often think of the battle of Carrhae and Antony's campaigns as well as the Roman invasions of the Second Century CE (Trajan, Lucius Verus, Septimius Severus) but they forget that, between Augustus' settlement towards the end of the first century BCE (the one where he supposedly secured the return of Crassus' lost eagle standards) and Trajan's invasion in 113, the Romans and Parthians enjoyed nearly a century of peace with the exception of Corbulo's war in Armenia from 58-63 CE. There was even one source which suggested that a few years later, Vologases I offered Parthian assistance to the Romans in their efforts to put down the Great Jewish Revolt of 67-73 CE. The image of the implacable enemy is far more appropriate for the Sassanians, with whom the Romans were nearly constantly at war. While conflict was certainly a major element of Roman-Parthian relations, their relationship is closer to that of tense rivals (think US and Russia during the Cold War) rather than embittered enemies (such as Rome/Carthage). At least that's my own view of their history. I'm happy to hear other people's perceptions on the topic. The subject of international relations in the ancient/classical world has always been fascinating to me.
Even the Sasanians were not seen as diehard enemies. Justinian spoke well of them and was friends with their ruler, and the house of Sasan which ruled the Sasanians had marriages into powerful eastern and western Roman family’s (as well as the Chinese)
It’s less that the Romans and Persians where die hard enemies, and more so they saw each other as one another’s greatest rival, no other was able to reach their level of glory, strength, and sophistication in each others eyes.
Great episode, as an Iranian I always praised parthians they established one of the first congress in the government through the ancient times (the congress was called Mahestan), they were more mithraic than zoroastrian, they never invaded anywhere and just defended their borders
'Never invaded anywhere' is quite a stretch considering Parthia was formed via conquest in the first place.
What about Iraq and Armenia.
@@Soul-co7ki don't mention those people to the iranians and the turks
I find the Parthian and Sassanid Empires to be fascinating. Surena (the Heroic one) is one of the great underrated generals in history
Loved this video, well done. There is very little known about Parthian history, but wanted to point out that the irrigation techniques were there from Achaemenid times originating in the Pars province and adopted by later empires including the Caliphates and the Chinese, it was known as Qanat. A real contribution of Parthians was their Nisaen Horses, who allowed the creation of Cataphracts, since these horses were large and strong enough to allow both themselves and their riders be covered in heavy armor, the Romans started breeding these horses after their defeat in Carrhae, the last recorded Nisaen horse was extinct during 11th century in Constantinople.
Well it's not strange since the Arcasids were descendants of Arcases ( Artaxerses II ) according to Marry Boice, in Parthian manuscripts they called their empire " Shahriarie Pars " which means the Persian Empire " .🔴The Arsacid dynasty of the Parthian empire claimed to derive their lineage from Arsaces/Artaxerxes II, according to Georgius Syncellus (1.539.16f. D.). This claim can be taken seriously, considering the name Artaxšahrakan applied to a royal vineyard mentioned in the Nisa documents (P. Gignoux, Glossaire des inscriptions pehlevies et parthes, Corp. Inscr. Iran., Suppl. Ser. I, London, 1972, p. 46b).
Awesome & informative video. Please more on ancient Iranian Empires.
Great! Would love to see more videons on Seleucid and Sassanid as well
Yes finally someone going into detail about parthia
Can you guys make videos on the Sassanid and Kushan Empires too.
They already did one on the Kushan.
Never thought I'd hear the words 'Scrooge McDuck' in a video about the Parthian empire
haha same
Also never expected to hear “Simpson’s style hit and run tactics”.
Fun fact:
The word partisan comes from "Parti-zan" which in Farsi means hitting like the Parthians. (Hit and run)
also the phrase Parthian-shot is added to dictionaries because of them.
Woah
I can't find a source for this, even though it sounds pretty cool. Do you have one?
@@czechmeoutbabe1997 Yeah, It seems to be false. Thanks for the correction.
@@czechmeoutbabe1997 It's clearly false. Partizan derives from the Latin word "partis" meaning portion or side. A partisan in one who takes a side, in fact you can say that one is partisan of a cause.
Always love the colorful maps. Detailed enough to inform but easy to understand at quick glance.
Rome: we defeated everyone we ever invaded
Parthia: how many times do we have to teach you this lesson, old man!?
The Parthians beat a few Roman glory hounds and regional governors. Trajan showed the true might of Rome when he invaded and took their capital. They only withdrew because Hadrian didn't think it was worth keeping. Did you not watch the video?
@@Ekaustonian Did YOU watch the video ? Because they clearly said the Parthians retook Mesopotamia
Trajan didn't face any formidable Parthian army in his campaign other than a small militia force south of Mesopotamia LOL
Plus the Parthian empire was divided in two with one fourth of it, where Trajan raided, being taken by the usurper Osroes I
And Trajan lost all territories
He only besieged cities in Mesopotamia
Mark Antony who had so much experience with Caesar, was a glory hound ? What the emperor at battle of Nisibis 217 ?
I never read Romans beating an Iranian army 4 or even 3 times their own army's size
They faced smaller Parthian armies most of the times
Largest Iranian armies they faced outnumbered them only 2 to 1 at max and that was only few times during the Sassanid era
@@EkaustonianRomaboo copium Remember shapur l?
@@cyrusthegreat7030 remember battle of Satala 298 A. D.
@@ramtin5152 remember battle of Satala 298 A. D.
If I could give two thumbs up I would. I love you videos covering an historic nation-state. Hope to see more on Iran in the future.
Already watched and man is it a great video. Really gave me insight into Persia and their background
6:10 Ashgabat is the modern city founded by in 19th century, the Parthian settlement was called Nisa.
Ashgabat was the name in Parthian Ashk-Abad (the city of Ashk/Arsaces)
Nisa was a Hellenic name
@@Shahanshah.Shahin Both are different cities
Asaak or Arshak city which is probably the real Ashk-Abad, is in Iran, Nesa is in modern day Turkmenistan
Nesa, if I'm not mistaken, was an old Sanskrit name, but it was also called Mehrdad Kert (the fort of Mehrdad) and was called Mithradatkert by Greco Romans
achaemenids > sassanids > Parthians
These 3 are my favourite persian empire dynasties. I sometimes even prefer sassanids. They improved on almost everything achaemenids and parthians gave them.
Shoutout to Nader Shah for being one of the best military commanders in Iran's history. And especially the Safavids for creating the strongest empire since the Sassanids.
It's kind of incorrect to call the Parthian empire «Persian». While all three are 'Iranian' civilizations, only the Achemenid and Sassanian empires were Persian.
As an Iranian i don’t like these comparisons at all ;in fact there could be no superiority between these three Iranian empires as they rised completely in different conditions and time line and based on differences of contexts the Parthians would gain the greatest honor as they were the true liberators of Iran in hellenistic age,revive Iranian ideology and politics and didn’t surrounded to foreign invaders like their Persian cousins Achaemenids and Sassanids +Parthians were more interested in liberty ,aristocracy and democracy while Sassanids were the most authoritarian and theocratic.
Agree but the Sassanids also suffered from hubris. Unfortunately, it contributed to the empire's downfall at the hands of Arab invaders.
Parthians were Median ( Kurds ) and Scythian, not persian.
"Simpson style hit-and-run tactics" - lol brilliant
Thanks!
Love that you made the clothing of iranians accurate. im so tired of hollywood portrayed iranians as arabs and indians.
Your pfp looks like Arab and Indian
Indian Arab and Iranian look same to me especially the man in your pfp
@@AL_AFGHANI1 The man in his pfp is a Sassanid (probably a Shah)
His look and outfit doesn't look anything like Arabs
@@ramtin5152 he does look like a Arab 🤣 the fact you deny that is hilarious
@@AL_AFGHANI1afghani is arab!!!? What are you thinking about
Amazing video, i hope in the future we see more of persian history, you could do a video similiar to this but for the sassanid empire
Love these one episode overviews of empires! More of these please!
As an Iranian, I personally never put a difference between our ancient kingdoms. But I do respect the Parthians more than Sasanians, for they were the ones to keep the Iranian culture alive. I'd also like to point out that all these various names and ethnicities were Iranian people at the end of the day, it's unfortunate to see others think about a bunch of Mullahs when they hear the word "Iran". The Mullahs are enemies and occupiers of Iran!
Parthians sided with Arabs against Sassanids.
@@arabianinferno6918but it’s true that some Parthians whished to witness another Iranian Empire just how they replaced Arsacid Parthians with Sassanid Persians.
There's needs to be a video covering the rise and fall of the Seleucid Empire as well.
the alexander the great videos on this channel cover some of the seleucid origins.
This video basically just did that. The fall began with the rise of Parthia
they rose by treachery and civil war, had some ups and downs. then unlike Parthians lost to some barbaric foreign power. And doomed Iranians up to this day and age because of Islam. Also the way they conduct religion was far worst. there's ur video :)
Parthia's strongest military force, the Cataphracti, was entirely composed of its aristocratic elite. If they ever lost a battle, then they lost the ruling elite of their empire. For similar reasons the Spartans were very, very reluctant about deploying all of its elite Hoplite infrantry, as they were also their ruling elite.
Parthia had 7 rulling houses, each were in charge of a vast teretory. These houses were consisted of a growing and large family. They mostly wanted to end the fight as soon as possible to go back to their lives. They did experience defeat several times. But they were always ready to defend the homeland against any foreign threat and they always succeed in defending or recapturing after a temporary loss of territory or settlement.
The same thing was true about medieval European knights, Who were btw influenced(indirectly, via Byzantines)of Cataphracts. Did not limited the number of European knights that much, eh?
YES! Always happy for more Persian content!
17:48 I think it's worth mentioning that it wasn't only the 20th century Iranian nationalists who chastised the Parthians for their Hellenophilia, but also the 3th century Persians/Sassanians, who used this as propaganda against them.
As an Iranian who grew up studying my country's vast history in school, I admit I didn't know much about Parthia. Thank you Kings and Generals!
Because they are not Persians 🤦🏻♂️ even at that time when they rose, your country was ruled by synthuans who were Greek. Get it over with please
synthuans? and he didn't even mention persians once. he said iranian.@@Ggggggggg631
@@Ggggggggg631 Persian or not, still Iranian like Persians
And the Scythians as mentioned in the video were Iranian people
Btw we Mazanis are the descendants of the Parthians and brothers with Persians
@@ramtin5152 Iranian is not the monopoly of Persians who suddenly decided to name themselves Iran 88 years ago 🤦🏻♂️ it is a way broader region than todays Iran
@@Ggggggggg631 Iran is an old word which was used by the Sassanids who called their country Iran or Iranshahr and Parthians named the country the same with an older version of the name, Aryanshahr or Eran
Awesome I’ve been looking for a video on Parthia and here it is from my favorite channel. Ty
"Simpsons style hit and run tactics" lmao, subtle but made me laugh.
I love how Kings and Generals fully embraced the crassus memes 😂
Great video
Please make a video on Vijayanagara Empire
Great video. A companion one on the Sassanian empire next?
(Before video comment) so excited to see this, many things mention the Persians, but usually as their enemy and I hear they were defeated, yet they prop up throughout a long period of history, so their culture must have been strong to have existed so long through so many defeats, there's very little information about Persian history from their prospective, very excited for this video
You forgot to mention the way they put out Selucid was the first Iranian Revolution after Alexander, they took their land back. Iranians would go and take their land back from Arabs, Mongols in the future. I would love Kings and generals covering that, absolutel epic come backs of Iranians after Alexander, Ghengis Khan & Islam. It is the oldest existing nation state in the world, Sassanians have "Iran" on the coinage and they're still speaking farsi inside Iran so many people don't know how much old and epic Iran is. Their fall is other people's triamph.
Another important point to mention is the eventual Persianization of the conquering peoples. The Greeks,Mongols and Turks all became Iranian after all. And as for Islam, in India for example it arrived as a Turko-Iranic effort rather then an Arab one. While Egypt and the Levant became Arab, Iran remained Iranian despite converting to Islam.
Thanks!
So it was
Elam then Persia/Achaemenid then Alexander’s Greece then Seleucid then Parthia then Sassanid.
Cool.
Another awesome video! Thanks for sharing and helping us all learn more
Would you consider making a video (even a short one) on how the Sassanids rose to power and their war of independence against/ overthrow of the two Parthian factions that were currently engaged in civil war?
Please tell us more about the history of Persia
«Simpsons style hit-and-run tactics» 😂
Didn't really expect the amount or style of humor in this video!
This video is accurate in that my knowledge of Parthia up to this point has been almost entirely comprised of their antagonism with Rome lol. Thank you for expanding my horizons. I would enjoy more videos on the Parthians in the future!
God be with you out there everybody. ✝️ :)
Parthian and the sasanid empire were basically one empire (iran) and these 2 were just different dynasties. The latest studies on ancient iran do label them as just one empire. Thanks for the awesome video as always
The Parthians were nomadic people from the northern areas who conquered most of the Seleucid Empire. The Sasanids were from Southern Iran. They seem like very different people. It's sort of like how the Assyrians and Babylonians controlled much of the same area, but are seen as different empires.
@@greywolf7577 Again, the latest studies do label them as one empire because the structure and organization didn't change much when the transition happened. The sassanids werent as centralized as earlier studies suggested and also relied on the parthian noble houses for suppport. The empire was called Aryanshahr in the parthian language and Eranshahr in Middle Persian and both mean Land of the Aryans/Iranians and Iran is another variation of this empires name.
Yeah, Ardashir's conquests were more of a coup
@@greywolf7577lol, Parthains and Persians are both western middle Iranian people, but most Parthians were still maintaining the nomadic lifestyle , Parth and Pars are two different pronounciation of the Persian term " partava / Parsava" meaning borderland( pahlavi/ pahlava ), parthian and Sassanid Persian are northern and southern branches of Middle Iranian, Parthians literally called their empire " Shahriarie Pars " ( Persian empire) 🔴The Arsacid dynasty of the Parthian empire claimed to derive their lineage from Arsaces/Artaxerxes II, according to Georgius Syncellus (1.539.16f. D.). This claim can be taken seriously, considering the name Artaxšahrakan applied to a royal vineyard mentioned in the Nisa documents (P. Gignoux, Glossaire des inscriptions pehlevies et parthes, Corp. Inscr. Iran., Suppl. Ser. I, London, 1972, p. 46b).
@@MM-dm4xjThe Hellenistic qualities seen in the Parthian empire all but disappeared under the Sassanids. These “new studies” are probably just Iranian nationalists.
I wish they mentioned how the Parthian dynasty that was in Armenia continued on for a while longer than the Parthian dynasty in Persia. Also to Kings and Generals...I think a great video would be something about all these mixed dynasties/countries in the indus river valley. Seeing the indo-greeks, indo-sythians, and indo-parthians was cool and I'd love to see a video about that.
The partian dynasty in Armenia was Armenized very quickly
they have made videos on them before, just search it
@@aregevoyan676google the Achaemenid Orontid Daynasty
Finally a defining documentary of Parthia.
Somehow I knew it would be K&G. Thank you friends!!!
good video, can't wait for the sequel on the sassanid empire!
Thank you for all these amazing works of art Kings and Generals ,truely appriciate what youre doing for the human history ❤
It's funny that history repeat itself. When Parthians comes from region of Parthia between Aral sea and eastern Iran would also the very spot where Oghuz Seljuk clan would established the Great Seljuk Empire that mirroring old Persian empires including Parthian themselves.
Man i have been waiting for this!
thank you for all the great videos . much love from iran . always love to see that us persians are not demonized by west like how they do in media and movies.
11:18 - "Simpsons-style Hit and Run Tactics".
Oh, yes, I remember that episode, about the Springfield-Shelbyville Wars.
True archenemies! 😅
Appreciate Kings And Generals
Great work as always!
11:56 Marcus Licinius Crassus, The Great Sponser of the First Triumvirate TH-cam Channel
11:55 ok, that is an amazinf description of Crassus and the Triumvirate
Would love to see a video on their successor, sassanids. ❤
Best channel on YT
Amazing 😍🤩
I would love a series about the Seleucid Empire! is there any chance, you'll make videos about them?
I imagine your sponsors appreciated the Parthian shot there at the end...
Nicee I have been waiting for more historical persian videos
This feels like one of the older videos on this channel (neither better nor worse than current ones, just different)
Another excellent video, love the Nomadic content
Parthians were the original Knights in history!
Knights are traditionally portrayed as heavy Calvary not hit and run horse archers
I loved this series, Good One!😇
Next: How the Parthian Successor (Sassanid) humiliating Roman (again).
@@TheRedKing- And killed one or two in battle
And suffering their own defeats and humiliations like any empire
Very interesting overview as always!
Thanks!
It's a shame we never got a HBO Rome season on the Parthian campaigns.
Because they either didn't wanted to show the disaster at Carthage, and the Parthian retaliation for Ventidius victories, during Mark Antony's Atropatene campaign which was also a humiliating defeat for Rome ...
Or maybe the budget wasn't enough for those great battles
How could the glorious Greco-Romans be shown being rivalled and even defeated by Middle Easterners?
11:56
"And great sponsor of the First Triumvirate TH-cam channel"
Was not expecting that to be thrown in there and nigh choked on my water
Great content as usual
Loved it thanks
Thank you, Kings and Generals! You guys got me interested in the Parthian Empire now due to its religious tolerance and diversity. Also, is it wrong to say that some Parthian institutions did revive during the time of the Safavid Iran? After all, it did practice religious tolerance and diversity to a certain degree. Heck, one certain Shah even found it out the hard way that forced conversion means no jizya and no jizya means no salaries for his officials and military.
This is well made, maybe people will actually learn history this way. You have my vote 😎
Please do sassanids next
You know that what i love the most about parthia history
even when they look down upon their own people (being barbaric) and steppe nomad, they still manage to show them all they more civilized then people in this time believe
I just love iranian history
A great video about a great but lesser known major power. Great work once again.
خیلی ممنونم بابت ویدیوی خوبتون ، لطفا درباره دیگر تمدن های باستانی ایران هم ویدیو بسازید ، و لطفا درباره قیام ها و شورش های ایرانیان دربرابر اعراب و مسلمانان هم ویدیو بسازید . ❤️❤️❤️ 🦁☀️
You should do a video of every faction of Rome 1 total war, awesome video!!!!
(Long comment)
The Parthians are very underrated and underestimated
The borders of the Parthian empire, especially the eastern ones, were vaster than that
They had control over satrapies of Khwarazm and Bactria
Their south eastern borders also reached as far as river Sindh
Even until after the three Roman invasions of Mesopotamia
Everyone keeps saying that their capital was sacked by Rome and Trajan campaign but they don't know about their victories
Before a summary of their victories, you should know that the capital that was sacked was one or two cities away from the eastern borders of Rome
It was sacked whenever there wasn't any army there or the empire was in civil war or during the reign of a weak king such as Osroes I (a usurper)
Look at the states of the Parthians and the Sassanid when Trajan and Carus attacked
Their empire was literally divided in two with the western parts of it being seized by a usurper king called Osroes I (same guy who provoked Trajan to attack) and the east was taken by a Kushan king while the Shahanshah wasn't present during Carus invasion
Pre islamic Iranian empires (except Medians) had several capitals around the empire
The Parthians had 7 different capitals with 4 or 5 of them being beyond Zagros mountains and outside Mesopotamia
The sack of Ctesiphon barely even mattered to them
Now back to the Parthian achievements in their battles against Rome :
Battle of Carrhae, Romans lost even though they outnumbered the Parthians more than 4-1 (43,000 Romans vs 10,000 Parthians) in open lands and after that, the Parthians plundered the lands of Judea, Syria, and southern Anatolia
Few years later after a setback in a skirmish with Cassius and another Roman commander in their first raid, Pacorus forces heavily defeated Lucius Decidius Saxa near Antioch
He fled to Cilicia where he was captured and executed by the Parthians
His legions reportedly suffered heavy defeats again and several of his aquilae were seized, being returned to Rome first after a brief Roman war against Parthia and negotiations after the disastrous defeats of Mark Antony
In Judea, the pro Roman Jewish forces of high priest Hyrcanus II, Phasael, and Herod were defeated by the Parthians as well
Mark Antony Atropatene campaign, 32,000-45,000 out of 127,000 Romans were killed by the Parthians who had only 40,000-50,000 soldiers
Mark Antony came back for another campaign against the Parthians with the help of a Median king but was again pushed back by the Parthians and also forced to go back to Rome because of his rivalry with Octavian
The Parthians also won at the battle of Urumia 36 BC
The Parthians were victorious at the battle of Rhandeia and inflicted a heavy defeat on the Romans who were forced to make a bridge for the Parthian king, Walagash I (Vologases I) could victoriously pass the river on his royal elephant's back
Even made Romans pass under his soldiers spears, which was the most humiliating thing for Roman legions
Trajan attacked when the Parthians were in a civil war (both because of the Parthian usurper king Osroes I who betrayed the treaty of Rhandeia) and still lost all the conquered cities to Iranian rebels after he left
Even during Trajan's invasion, the Parthians gained some victories
Trajan failed to take Hatra, which avoided a total Parthian defeat and he himself was wounded during the siege
The Parthian forces attacked key Roman positions, and Roman garrisons at Seleucia, Nisibis and Edessa were evicted by the local populaces and the Romans were pushed out of Mesopotamia with the defeat of Trajan's puppet king
The Parthians may have been defeated at the end of the Roman Parthian war of 161-166 but before that, they defeated and routed two Roman armies in Armenia and Syria and also won at the siege of Edessa 163
The Parthians were also victorious in war of Caracalla
Caracalla first chose to preoccupy himself with an invasion of Armenia, which was ruled by the Armenian kings who were chosen from the members of the Arsacid dynasty by the Parthian king himself, so he appointed a freedman named Theocritus as the leader of the invasion, which eventually ended in a disaster for Romans
The battle of Nisibis 217 AD was also won by the Parthians and the Roman emperor, Caracalla's successor, was forced to pay a heavy tribute
The tribute was 200 million sesterces, worth about US$13.7 billion at November 2021 gold prices
That also equals the amount of wealth the richest man of the Roman republic, Crassus, the Roman general at the battle of Carrhae had
I didn't see the part where the Parthians invaded and took Rome, Italy, Anatolia, or even Syria...oh right, the Romans beat the crap out of them when it mattered. The Parthians beat a few glory hounds looking to make a name for themselves in Rome. The Parthians lost when they faced the true might of Rome in Trajan. The Persians never could beat a Western Empire. It took the Turks coming in to accomplish anything notable against the West.
@@Ekaustonian Take a look at where Parthia was and then take a look at how far Italy is
When did I say anything about taking ? I said RAID
Plundering and leaving, because they had way less soldiers than Romans
Trajan didn't face any formidable Parthian army in his campaign other than a small militia
Plus the Parthian empire was divided in two with one fourth of it, where Trajan raided, being taken by the usurper Osroes I
And Trajan lost all territories
He only besieged cities
Mark Antony who had so much experience with Caesar, was a glory hound ?
I never read Romans beating an Iranian army 4 or even 3 times their own army's size
They always faced smaller Parthian armies
The only times the Sassanids used Turks was during the siege of Amida and even then most of the work was done by the Sassanids
It was Heraclius and his predecessors who had to beg Turks for help against the Sassanids
Because Rome did sack their capital 5 times….. and Parthia couldn’t even get past Anatolia…..
Rome also lasted much longer, while Persia had a new empire every hundred years lol
@@Vntihero 1 or 2 out of 7 capitals with the Parthians and later the Sassanids being in civil war during most of those 5 times
Plus look how close it was to the eastern borders of Rome
You think Rome was their only enemy ?
They had to keep an eye on the Kushans, deal with Scythian raids in the north, probably Arab raids in the south and go through civil wars that could last for decades
All of this while fighting against Roman invasions
The largest Parthian army in HISTORY (which defeated Mark Antony's) had only between 40,000 to 50,000 soldiers
Not to mention their previous victories against the superior enemies they had before Romans
And yet despite all of this, their empire survived for 471 years
lol I never seen Romans go over two cities while you are wrong Parthia did conquer some roman cities like Romans but I think you are stupid panturk cause you don't know that Persian empires was nonstop beating western empires and funny is that it's all were told by western historians 😂 but only thing ottomans did was defeating already destroyed byzantine empire but in past Persian empires win priceless battles and humiliated romans did you your empire was paying gold so that Parthia don't attack?😂
11:16
Possibly the greatest game on Nintendo Game Cube. It was so random yet fun. I believe it somewhat paved the way for the modern GTA franchise by rockstar.
What a throwy back to 2002, I'm glad you brought it up to remind the millennials of a good time gone by; these youngin' and their tiktok just don't know.
But they were Iranian people, that's what matters. Even if they adopted Hellenistic aspects along with Persian aspects, nothing detracts from the truth of their identity and nationality. Alexander also adopted many Persian aspects and was fascinated with Persian culture, but he was still Macedonian (Greek). Anyway, thank you for your efforts, it was just a small parenthesis😅
Yes it’s very important to modern Iranian nationalism to emphasise this. Just sit down and listen boy, it’s embarrassing.
@@LouisKing995 what the hell are you saying bro? I listened to it, and I won't say anything against it, yes, the Parthians also had interest in greek culture, but the loyalty of them to Iranian and Mithraic culture is an important thing that european "NaTiOnAlIsM" always ignore, that's why we Iranians say these things, it's good for you as well to learn to listen and see the other side of an coin my friend!!!
@@zitka123 Wrong, the Persians never saw Parthians as inferior!!
When Mithridates the Great of Parthia defeated the Seleucid army, the Fars province of Iran, which had gained its independence long before the rise of Parthia, was already governed by a small Persian dynasty called the Frataraka. In history, there is no sign of a war between the Parthian dynasty of "Arsacid" and the Persian dynasty of "Frataraka," and according to many historians, such as Dr. Touraj Daryaee, the Persians themselves accepted the rule of the Parthians and had no problem with them. In addition of this, in the Persians perspective never considered any nations inferior, they respected the culture and religion of others and tried to learn from them. What you said, "seeing inferior," is more related to the Greek and Roman point of view, not for Persians.
@@zitka123 May I know where this information of yours comes from? Or what is your claim based on?
The Persians were not unfamiliar with nomadic life, because just like the Parthians, they themselves were nomads before building their own great civilization, and even during their civilization, many of them moved from one city to another in a nomadic way. So there was no reason to see the Parthians as inferior because of their nomadic lifestyle, also, as previously mentioned, because of their perspective of respect for others as well, (two important signs).
Also, no, you said the Persians helped the Seleucids against the Parthians; no way, that's completely wrong. The Persians wanted their independence much earlier than the Parthians and considered themselves much more separate from the Greeks compared to the Parthians, who accepted many Greek aspects. The Avesta, the book of the Persians, which introduces Alexander as a monster, completely clarifies the Persian view of the Greeks and the Seleucid government in their land. Additionally, the Persian coins of the Frataraka dynasty in the Fars province of Iran, which were non-Greek coins modeled on Zoroastrian and Persian beliefs, further demonstrate this separation. Please think a little more before saying something (with respect).
@@zitka123 you're welcome
What are "Simpsons-style hit-and-run tactics" (11:18)? I googled it and got nothing...may also be a misstype in the the CCs, and "Simpsons" is actually something else? Regardless, curious if anyone can shed a little light on this.
Y'know, K&G having such high-quality content really makes their abruptly memetic jokes have a hundred times the impact.
I wasn't expecting to hear "Simpsons-style hit-and-run tactics," "Scrooge McDuck," and "financier of the First Triumvirate youtube channel" in the same minute.
Hope soon you'll do a video about the rise and fall of the Sassanid's and why they were the biggest threats to the Roman's
Waiting for the Turk comments which says Parthians were actually Turkic People lol.
@indiansecrets.com1762panibat neither the Parthians nor Scythians were Turkic, although the truth never stops the Turks from claiming them both.
We wuz the true *insert iranian thing*
I have never seen that. But I have seen iranian claiming obviously Turkic speaking dynasties as "Persianate" as if that makes sense.
They might as well just acquire Azerbaijan too since they have such a boner for them.
@@cyrusthegreat7030👳🏾♂️Persian 👨🏻🦰Schytian
Not bad, a good introduction for new people to Parthians. They had their ups and downs, they even lost their capitals. But they have never accepted defeat nor surrendered to their numerous enemies. Parthians were one of the very few in the history of the world, and at least the only one in Iran's 3000 written history, to always overcome their foreign enemies. Even in their decline, even in the last year of their rule, they defeated the Roman Empire, their arch-enemy. Unlike the Achaemenid empire or Sasanids, who were overthrown by Macedonians and barbaric Arabs. Parthians also were a more defensive nation, and they preferred to end the fight soon and go back to their lives.
Their number of casualties was always at a minimum. And their armies were so effective. You can check the numbers on battles. For instance, in Carrahe, they defeated the 40-45000 Romans (20k Legionnaires) with a mere 9000. And their casualties were less than a hundred men. Unlike the Sasanid empire which were proud to go to 20-year-long wars, lose thousands, and come back empty-handed to suppress their own people. Also, the Parthians were the only ancient or even modern empire that practiced democracy, when it came to their ruler.
Their senate or "Mahestan", was a combined gathering of the 7 ruling families (Vaspooheraan), that decided on who was more qualified to become King of kings. This was more than 2000 years ago. There was no rule that when a father dies, his elder son "should" become the ruler, NO! Maybe his 70-year-old uncle is fit to rule the country the best. As it did happen and thus generated good results.
If it weren't for the treacherous Sasanids, they would defend our lands against the barbaric Arabs. as they always did in their 500 years of proud history.
Stopped reading after you said they never accepted defeat or surrendered, I’m pretty the Parthian empire was defeated.
Do you know any other battles besides Carrahe?
Also in defence of the Romans it couldn’t have been to hard to shoot arrows at someone all day on horse against infantry. The Romans didn’t have a chance, heavy infantry trying to defeat light horse archers on an open field.
The Romans also took the Parthian Capital several times (under Trajan, Lucus during Emperor Marcus Aurelius time, Emperor Servius Africanus) so Carrahe was not the end but merely the beginning.
Wrote on phone hence i probably made a tonne of spelling mistakes
@gelraldoldo5152 The Parthians military achievements against their powerful Greek and Roman foes are very underrated and underestimated
They rose from a small kingdom with three cities and few tribes and overcome the Seleucid empire and the Greco Bactrian kingdom
Under Arashk I/Arsaces I they lured the imperial army of Seleucus II into Central Asia and decisively defeated the Seleucids, capturing Seleucus in battle
During the reign of Mihrdat I/Mehrdad I/Mithridates I the great they reconquered the great Iran, conquered the Greco Bactrian kingdom, repelled a Saka invasion, conquered the Medians, defeated and captured the Seleucid king Demetrius II Nicator in battle around Zagros mountains
Under Phraates II the Seleucids launched a military campaign against the Parthians with an army of 80,000 men but the Parthians defeated them again at the battle of Ecbatana 129 BC and killed the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes
During the reign of Mihrdat II/Mehrdad II/Mithridates II the great the Parthians under Gotarzes I faced the allied forces of the Seleucid king Antiochus X and Queen Laodice in battle and defeated them as well, killing Antiochus X in the process
One of Gotarzes satraps (who was probably his brother or half brother) named Mithridates III attacked the Seleucid army of king Demetrius III Eucaerus in the middle of the desert and almost annihilated it, capturing the king alive
Crassus campaign, Roman invasion repelled
Battle of Carrhae, Romans lost even though they outnumbered the Parthians more than 4-1 in open lands (43,000 Romans vs 10,000 Parthians) and after that, the Parthians plundered the lands of Judea, Syria and southern Anatolia
Armenia also went under the Parthian rule again
Few years later, after a previous setback in a series of skirmishes with Cassius and another Roman commander, Pakur/Pacorus forces heavily defeated Lucius Decidius Saxa near Antioch
He fled to Cilicia where he was captured and executed by the Parthians
His legions reportedly suffered heavy defeats again and several of his aquilae were seized, being returned to Rome first after a brief Roman war against Parthia and negotiations after the disastrous defeats of Mark Antony
Pacorus forces also defeated pro Roman Jewish forces of high priest Hyrcanus II, Phasael, and Herod (this is before Ventidius campaign)
Second Roman invasion after Ventidius campaign
Mark Antony Atropatene campaign, 32,000-45,000 of Antony's army of 127,000 men were killed by the Parthians while the Parthians had only 40,000-50,000 soldiers
They also defeated the Romans at the battle of Urumia 36 BC
Mark Antony came back for another campaign against the Parthians with the help of a traitor Median king but was again pushed back and forced to go back to Rome because of his rivalry with Octavian while the Parthians and their new Armenian allies defeated his and the Median king's forces and brought Armenia under the Parthian rule again
Roman Parthian war 58-63 AD
The Parthians were victorious at the battle of Rhandeia and inflicted a heavy defeat on the Roman army
They made Romans build a bridge so that the Parthian Shahanshah can pass the river while sitting on his royal elephant
Even made Romans go under their spears, which was the most humiliating thing for Roman legions
By the end of this war, the Parthians reconquered Armenia again
There were 7 Parthian capitals in several different regions of the empire in total and whenever Ctesiphon was sacked, the Romans faced no Parthian army
Trajan attacked when the Parthians were in a civil war (both because of the Parthian usurper, Osroes I, who betrayed the treaty of Rhandeia) and still lost all the conquered cities to Iranian rebels in a few months after he left
Even during Trajan's invasion, the Parthians gained some victories
Trajan failed to take Hatra, which avoided a total Parthian defeat and he himself was wounded during the siege
The Parthian forces attacked key Roman positions, and Roman garrisons at Seleucia, Nisibis and Edessa were evicted by the local populaces and the Romans were pushed out of Mesopotamia with the defeat of Trajan's puppet king thus reconquering all the territories that were lost during the invasion and fighting Romans off to a stalemate
The Parthians may have been defeated at the end of the Roman Parthian war of 161-166 but before that, they defeated and routed two Roman armies in Armenia and Syria and even successfully besieged Edessa in 163
They might have won in the end if it wasn't for a plague
The war of Caracalla
Ever since the treaty of Rhandeia, a Parthian prince from Arsacid dynasty picked by the Parthian king himself, would sit on the throne of Armenia but was crowned there by Romans (they became a different branch of the Arsacid dynasty)
Caracalla chose to preoccupy himself with an invasion of Armenia
He appointed a freedman named Theocritus as the leader of the invasion, which eventually ended in a disaster for Romans who were defeated by the Parthian Armenian rebels and repelled from Armenia
After that, the Parthians won the battle of Nisibis 217 AD and the Romans were forced to pay a heavy tribute of 200 million sesterces which equalled the wealth of the richest man of the Roman republic, Crassus, the Roman general at the battle of Carrhae
@@gelraldoldo5152 You can't pay attention. I never said they didn't lose anything. I said they didn't accept it. and they never got conquered! they kept fighting, and took back whatever they lost. check out the other reply for an in depth winning streak of the Parthians ;)
Always wondered what happened to these Iranian Nomads. Thank You for showcasing this to us.
They still exist but as small tribes, most of them choose modern lifestyles so they got out of nomadic tribal life. Those ancient tribes who lived in the satrapy of Parthia in what's called Turkmenistan today were probably relocated into the Iranian heartland by the Caspian sea or khorasan region , some might have gone to extinct by the turkic invaders ,and some might have mixed with them .
If you don’t mind me asking but can you do videos on the Indo Scythian Kingdom, The Indo Parthian Kingdom, The Northern and Western Satraps and The Kushan Empire.
The Indo Scythian kingdom was a group of nomadic Iranian people of Scythian origin who migrated from Central Asia southward into the northwestern Indian subcontinent but to be precise the modern day south Asian regions of Afghanistan, Pakistan and northern India and they ruled from 150 Bc to 400ad and they were the first of a group of nomadic peoples known as the sakas.
The northern satrap and western satraps were dynasties of Saka Rulers who ruled parts of India with the northern satrap ruling over the area of punjab and Mathura after the decline of the indo Greek kingdom while the western satrap were the rulers of the Western and central parts of India but to be precise the modern day province of Sindh in Pakistan and the Indian states of Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh and the northern satraps ruled from 60 bc to the 2nd century Ce while the western satraps ruled from 35ce to 415ce.
The Indo Parthian Kingdom was a Parthian kingdom that ruled an area covering parts of eastern Iran, various parts of Afghanistan and the northwest regions of the Indian subcontinent( most of modern Pakistan and parts of northwestern India) and they belonged to the house of suren which is one of the two Parthian noble families and it ruled from 19ce to 226ce.
When the Indo Scythians and Indo Parthian kingdoms along with the northern and western satraps collapsed a new power took over their domains and this new power was the Kushan Empire which was most probably one of the five branches of Yuezhi confederation and the Kushans were an Indo European nomadic people of possible Tocharian origin and they migrated from northwestern China(Xinjiang and Gansu) and settled in ancient Bactria and they had diplomatic contacts with many of the powers at that time like the Roman Empire, The sasanians, The Kingdom of Aksum and The Han Dynasty of China and The Kushan Empire was at the center of trade relations between Rome and China and according to French historian Alain Danielou” for a time the Kushan Empire was the center point of the major civilizations and while much philosophy art and science was created within its borders the only textual record of the history of the empire’s history today comes from inscriptions and accounts in other languages particularly Chinese and the empire was established in the year 30ce and ended in 375ce and the Kushan empire fragmented into semi independent kingdoms in the 3rd century ad and these kingdoms fell to the sasanians who were invading from the west and established the Kushano Sasanian kingdom in the areas of Sogdiana, Bactria and Gandhara but in the 4th century pressure came from the east in the form of the Gupta empire an Indian dynasty however in the year 375 the last of the Kushan and Kushano Sasanian kingdoms were eventually overwhelmed by new invaders from the north and these invaders were the Kidarites aka the Kidara Huns and a group known as The Hephthalites aka The White Huns.
Absolutely would love videos focused on North-Western India(modern day Pakistan). Indo-Greeks,Indo-Scythians,Indo-Parthians,Kushans,Huna are all extremely under rated instead overshadowed by the Islamic invasion from Central Asia but their predecessors are not widely known unfortunately
It'd be great to see a video... one like this about the Sassanid empire
An empire that could only have arisen in Iran. What a wonderful and unique era in middle eastern history.
Great job mate.
Achaemenid Empire, Parthian Empire, Sassanid Empire:
Three Iranian(Persian) Global Superpower empires which ruled the world for almost 1000 years alongside the Romans and Greeks!
🇮🇷🇮🇷🇮🇷
I always wish these ancient times lost forever could be have been visible 😢
*K&G* 👋👋
*Can You Guys Please Make a video on the Land of Punt*
*These peoples known as the proto-Cushites Have been known as a great civilization by even Egypt itself*
*Would love to see how Horn of African Peoples Had managed to become a the centre of Trade between west and east and the later Successor states of Macrobia and the Trading emporiums*
Excellent video
They once humbled Rome
*Parthians exit the chat*
Rome: *sighs with relief*
*Sassanids enter the chat*