and trying to work upon the desire he fancies he may be secretly entertaining of some great enterprise whereby he may regain the kingdom of his father David and restore Hebrew independence, if not even found a Jewish empire. Now, in this portion of the temptation, he still keeps this in view. "Mark all these lands and cities," he says to Christ ; "they are those Eastern lands which have been famous for ages; they have been possessed successively by different powers or dynasties— Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Græco-Macedonian; and now, for some ages past, they have been in possession of the Parthians. It was the great Arsaces, about 280 years ago, that first revolted from the GræcoSyrian kings, whose capital was Antioch in Syria; and his successors are still masters of all these splendid regions. These famous lands of the East now constitute, let me remind you, The Parthian Empire! Mark that; for I have a scheme to propound to you in consequence."

298-344. "And just in time thou com'st . . . for now the Parthian king," &c. This episode of an actual expedition of the Parthian troops against the Scythians, as happening about the time of Christ's temptation, so as to allow a glimpse of their array and manœuvres from the mountain-top, seems to be a pure invention of the poet. We know too little of Parthian history to be able to specify its incidents in any one year, or even to give an accurate list of the Parthian kings. The invasion of the Parthian dominions by Crassus, which ended so disastrously for the Romans, took place B.C. 53, when the Parthian king was Orodes I. He was murdered and succeeded by his son Phraates IV., during whose reign (B.C. 37-A.D. 4) war was continued between the Parthians and the Romans; but latterly terms of peace were established, and four sons of Phraates were sent to Rome, as hostages, or to be educated. Murdered in turn, Phraates was succeeded by one of his sons named Phraataces, who, however, did not reign long; and from this time the affairs of Parthia appear to have gone more and more into weakness and confusion, though it was not till A.D. 226 that the empire of the Arsacidae was nominally abolished, and a new dynasty founded in those regions by the Persian Ardashir Babegan. At the time supposed in the text, therefore, what was going on within the Parthian Empire, whether at Ctesiphon or anywhere else, is profoundly obscure; but the incident which the poet imagines-of a review of Parthian troops, preparatory to a march against invading hosts of Scythians from the north-is true to the possibility of the time; while it affords him an opportunity for a fine poetical description of those evolutions of the Parthian cavalry, shooting their arrows equally in retreat as in advance, which were so terrible to the Romans. Sogdiana, which the Scythian invaders are supposed to have wasted, was the extreme province of the Parthian Empire to the north-east, beyond the Oxus.

309. "In rhombs, and wedges, and half-moons, and wings." All these, as Dunster explained, are ancient military terms. The "rhomb"

(poμßorin's púλay) was an acute-angled parallelogram, with the acute angle in front; the "wedge" (eμßoλor, or cuneus) was half of a rhomb, or an acute-angled triangle, with the acute angle in front; the "halfmoon" was a crescent with the convex to the enemy; the "wings" (képara, or ala) were the extremes or flanks. Mr. Keightley says these names were used only for infantry formations.

311. "the city-gates," i.e. the gates of Ctesiphon, where the muster takes place.

312, 313. "In coats of mail . . . in mail their horses clad." True to the Roman accounts of the Parthian troops, according to which both horses and riders wore a kind of chain armour.

316-321. “From Arachosia . . . to Balsara's haven." Another of those enumerations of well-sounding proper names of which Milton is so fond. Arachosia is nearly the modern Afghanistan ; Candaor is probably the town Kandahar in Afghanistan; Margiana was a province on the northern frontier, adjoining the invaded Sogdiana; the " Hyrcanian cliffs of Caucasus " stand for the province of Hyrcania, also in the north, bordering on Margiana; the "dark Iberian dales" are those of the province of Iberia, north of Armenia, and between the Euxine and the Caspian; Atropatia or Atropatene was part of Media proper ; Adiabene, part of Assyria, near Nineveh; Media and Susiana explain themselves; Balsara's haven is the port of Balsara, or Bussorah, on the Persian Gulf.

324. "arrowy showers." In the original edition "shower," but with a direction, among the Errata, to change into "showers"—a direction not attended to in the Second Edition.

327. "clouds of foot." Homer, Iliad, IV. 274, has répoç Ter; and Virgil, Æn. VII. 793, nimbus peditum. (Newton.)

337. "Such forces met not," &c. Dunster compares Par. Lost, I. 574, and quotes Lucan, Phars. vII. 288 :—

"Coiere nec unquam

Tam variæ cultu gentes."

338-343. "When Agrican . . . Charlemain." The romance here referred to is Boiardo's Orlando Innamorato, where there is a description of the siege of Albracca, the city of Gallaphrone, King of Cathay, by Agricane, King of Tartary, in order to obtain possession of the fair Angelica, Gallaphrone's daughter, already known at Charlemagne's court and celebrated throughout the world. The numbers represented in the romance as engaged in this siege are prodigious—myriads on each side. Hence, as Warton pointed out, Cervantes in his Don Quixote refers to the siege very much as Milton here does: "Before

we are two hours in these crossways, we shall see armed men more numerous than those that came to Albracca, to win Angelica the Fair."

342. "prowest," bravest, most valiant, most approved.-Prow (Fr. Preux, Ital. Próde) and Prowess are supposed to be originally from the Latin Probus. Both words are found in the oldest English authors, and Spenser has the exact phrase “prowest knight."

343. "Paynim," Pagan. The two words are the same, save that Pagan is directly from the Latin (Paganus), while Paynim is through the French (paien or payen). Paynim as a noun singular, and Paynims, plural, are found in Robert of Gloucester.

350. "show" printed "shewn "shew" is the reading of the First.

or "shown" in most editions; but

357. "of David's throne," i.e. of all those dominions which had belonged to David in the palmy days of the Hebrew monarchy, before its diminution, or the division of Palestine into the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel.

358, 359. "none opposite, Samaritan or Jew," i.e. none opposing thee -neither the Jews or inhabitants of Judæa, nor the Samaritans, between whom and the Jews there had been such a mutual antipathy for generations, grounded on the fact that, in consequence of colonization since the carrying away of the Ten Tribes, the Samaritans were not a pure Hebrew race. Palestine consisted now of three political divisionsJudæa, Samaria, and Galilee; but, as the Galileans went with the Jews in the main, they are not here distinguished.

361, 362. "Between two such enclosing enemies, Roman and Parthian." Satan is now explaining more exactly the scheme he has been keeping in reserve. After having shown Christ the Parthian Empire and its resources, he bids him remember that the whole power of the world is then divided between that Empire and the Romans. The Parthians are in the ascendant in the east and the Romans in the west; these two are the rival powers; all others hold by these or are insignificant. Now in what state is Palestine-that country to the political deliverance and resuscitation of which Christ might be looking forward? Since B.C. 65, when the empire of the Seleucida was destroyed by Pompey, Syria, as a whole, had been annexed to the Roman Empire; but in Judæa, by sufferance of the Romans, the native dynasty of the Asmonæans or Maccabees (see previous note, lines 165-170) had continued to hold. the kingly and priestly power for some time longer. The last prince but one of this dynasty was Hyrcanus II. (B.C. 78-40). Owing to disputes for the throne between him and his brother Aristobulus, the Romans did interfere in Jewish affairs; and Jerusalem, where Aristobulus had shut himself up, was besieged and taken by Pompey (B.c. 63).

Aristobulus was sent prisoner to Rome; and Hyrcanus was left in possession under Roman protection. But Antigonus, a son of Aristobulus, renewing the civil war, called in the aid of the Parthians, who were then trying to wrest Syria from the Romans. With their aid he dispossessed his uncle Hyrcanus, B.C. 40, and assumed the kingly title. The real power in Palestine, however, had passed by this time to the family of Antipater, the Idumæan, who, nominally the prime minister of Hyrcanus II., had actually governed for him. Antipater and his son Herod, whom he had made governor of Galilee, had been careful to ingratiate themselves with the Romans; and, going to Rome, Herod had little difficulty in obtaining from the Senate a grant of the kingdom of Judæa for himself. Antigonus, though backed by the Parthians, was unable to hold his place against Herod, thus backed by the Romans; he was taken and put to death, B.C. 37; and with him ended the dynasty of the Asmonæans or Maccabees, though scions of the family still remained, one of whom was Mariamne, the wife of Herod. With Herod, called HEROD THE GREAT, began a new dynasty in Palestine, which may be called the Idumæan dynasty. Herod's dominions included not only all Palestine proper, consisting of Judæa, Samaria, and Galilee, but also some adjoining regions; and, though, in the civil war between Augustus and Antony, he took the side of Antony, he afterwards managed to pacify Augustus, and retained his dominions till his death. This event occurred B.C. 4; for, though Christ was born in the last year of Herod's reign (Matt. i.), our chronology dates the Christian era from a point later by four years than the actual year of Christ's birth so fixed. On Herod's death, his dominions were divided, by his will, between two of his sons-ARCHELAUS taking the southern part, including Judæa and Samaria; and HEROD ANTIPAS (the "Herod" who caused John the Baptist to be beheaded) the northern part, including Galilee. The Romans, however, as the real masters, modified this arrangement, giving a certain share to PHILIP, Herod's son by Mariamne; and at length (A.D. 7) they deposed and banished Archelaus, and converted Judæa and Samaria into a Roman province, to be governed by "procurators under the prefects of Syria. Pontius Pilate was procurator from A.D. 26 to A.D. 36, Galilee and other northern parts of Palestine remaining with Herod Antipas, who governed them as "tetrarch."-All in all, then, "David's throne," or that region which had formed the Hebrew monarchy in its palmy state, was now a fragment of the Roman Empire-the Romans viewing Palestine as a mere fraction of their rich Syrian prefecture. But beyond Syria were the Parthians, on whose empire the Romans, with all their efforts, had made little impression; and Syria itself was a kind of debateable land between the Romans and the Parthians. Here the two rival empires met; and, as often as the Romans tried to invade the Parthians, the Parthians retaliated by covering Syria with their clouds of horse. For an independent power to spring up, therefore, in Syria, and hold its own against two such great empires

nipping it between them, was all but impossible. So Satan represents to Christ; and he then goes on to suggest that the best means of attaining the object which he supposes Christ to have in view will be to make alliance with one of the two rival powers. The real ingenuity of the policy so suggested is brought out, I think, by the historical circumstances which have been explained in this and previous notes.

363-368. "the Parthian first . . . Antigonus and old Hyrcanus

maugre the Roman." Satan suggests that it may be better to try first what may be done through a Parthian alliance-first, because the Parthians are nearer and may be more easily negotiated with; and, secondly, because recent events have shown both the willingness and the power of the Parthians to make a stroke against the Romans in Syria and Palestine. Here, however, well acquainted as Milton shows himself to be with the history of the Jews from the time of the Maccabees downwards, and aptly as he uses his knowledge, he falls into a slight error. The Parthians had certainly carried away "old Hyrcanus," i.e. Hyrcanus II., maugre the Roman (see preceding note); but they had never carried away Antigonus-who, on the contrary, had been the one to avail himself of the aid of the Parthians against his uncle Hyrcanus, and had been kept on the throne of Judæa three years by that aid (see preceding note). Satan's advice to Christ, in fact, is that he should. repeat the feat of Antigonus. If he were to divulge to the Parthians his claims, by descent, to the throne of David-claims so much better than those of the Asmonæans, who, after all, were originally but heroic interlopers might not the Parthians espouse his cause, and do even more for him than they had done for Antigonus? This would be a beginning, and the rest would depend on himself. The reign of Antigonus had been but a short one-the Romans taking him in spite of the Parthians, and putting him to death (B.C. 37) to make way for Herod.—“ Old Hyrcanus" may very well be called so; for, though dispossessed by Antigonus, and carried away by the Parthians, B.C. 40-his ears having been cut off by order of Antigonus that he might be disqualified by that mutilation from ever being again High Priest-he returned to Jerusalem, and lived there under the protection of Herod till B.C. 30, when Herod, fearing a revival of the Asmonæan dynasty, put him to death at the age of eighty. Mariamne was the granddaughter of Hyrcanus.

370. "by conquest or by league." Though league with the Parthians would be the more natural plan, the plan might be, if Christ preferred it, a conquest of the Parthian Empire in the first place, so as to be able to wield its resources against Rome. Anyhow only through these resources of Parthia could the enterprise succeed.

372-376." That which alone can truly reinstall thee . . . deliverance of thy brethren, those Ten Tribes," &c. Here is a farther development of Satan's plan, the splendid ingenuity of which has not, I think, been sufficiently noted. Not only on general grounds might one say that