BMCR 2009.03.51, Beate Dignas, Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity

Beate Dignas, Engelbert Winter, Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity:
Neighbours and Rivals.  Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Pp. 347, figs. 18, maps 14.  ISBN 978-0-521-61407-8.  $34.99 (pb).

Reviewed by Alan Farahani, University of California, Berkeley
([email protected])
Word count:  2747 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2009/2009-03-51.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2009/03/20090351.html
-------------------------------

The Sasanian Empire has often been neglected or marginalized compared
to its Western (and in more recent years, its Eastern, Chinese)
neighbor. Studies that focus on the Roman Near East usually include the
Sasanians only when warfare between the Romans and the Sasanians is
involved, and such analyses are frequently undertaken from an
exclusively Roman perspective. Lately, however, there has been an
increased interest in understanding not only Roman-Sasanian relations
more fully, but also in generating multifaceted approaches to the
Sasanian impact on the Near East.[[1]] To this end, the present volume,
coauthored by Beate Dignas and Engelbert Winter, seeks to fill an
intellectual gap and provide a narrative and sourcebook on Roman and
Sasanian relations "based on a foundation that shows respect for the
history of the East and does not shape this history according to
Western needs" (p. 2). This English-language edition published in 2007
by Cambridge University Press is the successor to a German-language
original (Rom und das Perserreich. Zwei Weltmaechte zwischen
Konfrontation und Koexistenz) published in 2001 by Akademie Verlag.
This edition is not merely a translation; the authors have greatly
expanded on their original text and have added new chapters, new maps,
updated appendices, and have in places responded, above all, to
comments provided by one of the original reviewers, Stefan R. Hauser, a
historian and archaeologist of the Parthian and Sasanian periods of
Iran.[[2]] As Hauser's evaluation surveyed the entirety of the book,
much of the content of which remains unchanged, this review focuses
instead on the impact of the revisions upon the original.

In light of the stated goal of the book, this work in many ways
accomplishes its modestly stated ambition. That is, the authors wish to
provide a brief narrative and then a compendium of passages (with short
but meaningful analyses) pertinent to Roman-Sasanian relations useful
to the "undergraduate and non-specialist audience". Such an endeavor is
particularly aided by the book's structure and navigable presentation.
This edition still captures the fundamental strength of the original
study in that it provides a non-intimidating and still detailed
introduction (a "textbook") with which to approach the multiple
dimensions of the relationship of Rome and Sasanian Iran, primarily in
in bello and in post bellum diplomacy.

The addition of two new chapters ('Warfare' and 'Emperor and King of
kings') as well as a subchapter ('Armenia') greatly enhances the
utility of the study as a whole. In fact, the most commendable quality
of this book is its ability to transmit information using highly
polished source material in translation; without this exposure in a
readable format, some of these texts might well be overlooked even by
specialists. The new English translations of Greek, Latin, Syriac,
Armenian, and Middle Persian sources are smooth, clear, and accessible.
Likewise the presence of frequent but light footnoting, dispersed
throughout a majority of these passages, enhances their usefulness
substantially; such mild referencing encourages intent readers to
explore extended analyses. Nevertheless, in a work committed to
describing the sometimes violent and ever mutating relationship of two
major empires over a period of 400 years, it is not easy to accommodate
many frequently opposing views. Thankfully the authors often refer to
the controversial nature of their interpretations of historical events,
even if they usually do so only in footnotes. More difficult to
reconcile, however, is the authors' somewhat dubious methodology
concerning the dichotomy of East and West, an issue that shall be
explored in full below.

The book begins with a revised Preface in which the authors acknowledge
the many suggestions they received from colleagues in the field. In
this context, they underscore their intent to respond to the presence
of a 'discipline-wide' Eurocentrism through their own emphasis upon
"Eastern textual and visual testimonies". This contrasts with the
authors' admission in the similarly revised "Introduction" that their
own emphasis is on Roman history. Nonetheless, they assert that a
fuller understanding of Roman-Sasanian relations must be grounded on
extra-military affairs and must incorporate social and economic
dynamics. The authors continue by augmenting the "Introduction" with a
valuable summary of important literature on Roman-Sasanian relations
and on surveys of Late Antiquity since the publication of the German
original. This initial presentation of newer scholarship presages the
subsequent depth and breadth of secondary literature that the authors
cite in support of their narrative and source criticism. Although the
authors do not claim to present a "comprehensive sourcebook", the
presence of an extended bibliography of 43 pages is a tremendous asset.
This bibliography will long serve as an excellent resource for
researchers in this field.

After the Introduction, the book is divided into two major sections,
one dealing with the "Narrative" (Part I) of Roman-Sasanian conflicts,
and the other with "Sources and Contexts" (Part II). In turn, each
major section is divided into a series of chapters and then
sub-chapters. Each sub-chapter is a nearly independent unit of content
(e.g. "Sasanian Armaments and Tactics" or "Economy and Trade"); these
sub-chapters are often cross-referenced throughout the book, especially
in the narrative of Part I. This division of chapters only slightly
improves on the closely similar German original.

Chapter 1 begins with a brief, but useful discussion of diplomatic and
military contacts between Rome and Iran up to the 3rd century CE. In
this section the authors refer to the Iranian identity of the Parthian
and Sasanian polities given their desire to address the social
underpinnings of each interacting party. Unfortunately this crucial
identification is not maintained throughout the book, and instead
recedes in face of the characterization of Sasanian Iran as "the East".
The first chapter also illustrates the largely error-free and readable
English translation.

Apparent after the first page of the narrative (p.10) is the
introduction of a new, large map. It is noteworthy that the authors
have completely replaced all of the maps from the German edition (which
were themselves outstanding) in favor of new ones drawn from various
English-language sources. Readers will certainly appreciate the
presence of the clean, well-illustrated, and numerous maps that are
provided, still rather rare in many histories of this region during
similar eras. But while most are largely without error, some contain
noticeable mistakes. For example: Persepolis is located east, not west,
of Istakhr (p. 21); Dvin lies northeast of, not south of, Artaxata
(p.31); and on one map one finds Hecatompylos spelled as
"Hacatomphylos" along with Ecbatana rendered as "Ecoatana" (p.198).

Chapter 2 then surveys the military and diplomatic relations between
the Roman and Sasanian Empire until the collapse of the latter in the
seventh century CE. The authors successfully survey a wide expanse of
chronological terrain century by century, cross-referencing particular
events to sub-chapters in Part II of the book (as in the German
original). It is one of the better recent narratives of military and
political relations between Sasanian Iran and Rome. From this point
onward, however, the authors at times refer to the expansion of the
Sasanian empire as following "a far-reaching and programmatic foreign
policy" (p.33). The concept of a "foreign policy" (especially a
programmatic one) may be a bit misleading to the extent that it
retrofits modern labels to ancient phenomena, although the authors
recognize its controversial connotation. Throughout Part I there is
also a recurring tendency to reduce the complexities of Roman-Sasanian
interactions and even descriptions of these interactions to
dichotomies. For instance, the return of the Holy Cross to Jerusalem in
628 C.E. is characterized as "the final victory of the West over the
East" (p. 47).

Part II, entitled "Sources and Contexts", is the larger of the two
parts, containing nine chapters: 1) Political goals; 2) Warfare; 3)
Military confrontations; 4) The diplomatic solutions; 5) Arabia between
the great powers; 6) Shared interests: Continuing conflicts; 7)
Religion: Christianity and Zoroastrianism; 8) Emperor and 'King of
kings'; 9) Exchange of information between West and East. Among these
chapters and subchapters, a subchapter entitled "Armenia" (within
Chapter 6), as well as Chapters 2 "Warfare" and 8 "Emperor and King of
kings" represent new material. The introduction of "Armenia" alongside
the importance given (an entire chapter) to Arabia's position between
the two principal empires serves as an excellent corrective to other
analyses that do not take such important regions into consideration
within this diplomatic context. Areas once relegated the status of
buffer zones or outlying regions are carefully incorporated by the
authors with thoughtful analysis and a judicious attention to detail.

Chapter 1 of Part II ('Political goals') begins with a slightly
modified introductory paragraph that is characteristic of the new
non-chapter additions to the text. In it the authors emphasize that the
"following examination...should not evoke the impression that the
Sasanians acted as aggressors" (p. 53). Yet even with a constant
reiteration of this awareness, a notable stress on Sasanian aggression
still percolates through the text. For instance, the authors at one
point characterize the Sasanians as a "dangerous opponent" (p.90), a
phrase not extant in the German original in this position. Nearly every
introductory paragraph in each chapter of Part II contains some subtle
additions that serve to embody the authors' commitment to addressing
their scholarly peers' suggestions.

Chapter 2 ('Warfare'), a new chapter, while incredibly short (seven
pages, three with illustrations), is a worthwhile addition. Though not
comprehensive, it provides a manageable commentary on two Late Antique
sources on Sasanian armament and tactics, namely one passage from both
Heliodorus' Aethiopica and Maurice's Strategikon. At the same time, a
supplement of what is known about Sasanian warfare from an
archaeological perspective (admittedly not the focus of this book)
would have benefited interested readers.[[3]] In general the
archaeological contribution to the overall study still remains
relatively meager. This is unfortunate given that our knowledge of the
Sasanian world is impaired if seen only through the lens of textual
evidence.

The next significant addition is located in Chapter 3 ('Military
confrontations'), which includes a treatment of the very "Eastern
textual...testimonies" the authors earlier promise to provide. In a
subsection dealing with Shapur I's wars with Rome, Ferdowsi, the author
of the Iranian epic, the Shahnameh, is presented as an exemplar of the
so-called "Eastern" perspective (pps. 82-84). However, claims that the
illustrations of a Shahnameh commissioned in 1605 C.E. by the Safavid
emperor Shah Abbas represent "how the Sasanians saw themselves", (p.84)
seem stretched. The lack of the mention of Daqiqi (the initiator of the
New Persian Shahnameh) and of the Xwaday Namag (the original Sasanian
'book of kings' on which the Shahnameh was based; acknowledged on p.253
n. 42) as the foundations of the Shahnameh, omits important background
information that is useful to the authors' goal of incorporating more
extra-Greco/Roman material into their original text. In Chapter 3 the
authors also significantly add to their discussion of the first
Sasanian-Byzantine war (502-532 C.E.; p.100-6) by providing two new
textual sources, Joshua the Stylite (90; 309.1-310.3) and Marcellinus
Comes (a. 518) as well as a discussion of archaeological evidence--such
occasional supplements greatly add to the quality of information
presented.

Chapter 6 ('Shared interests: Continuing conflicts') includes a new
subchapter ('Armenia'), which in its depth and scope is an excellent,
and essential, addition to the book. The authors provide Greek, Latin,
and Armenian sources in their treatment of the geopolitical importance
of Armenia during this period. As it is often difficult to elucidate
the history of Armenia because of a later adoption of a native textual
historiography, the authors have struck a reasonable balance in their
inclusion of Armenian sources. Admittedly, Armenian scholars might opt
for a different selection, but, given the constraints of scale, the
authors have succeeded commendably. Still, the authors questionably
highlight the Armenian cultural refusal to 'accept' the Zoroastrian
religion without discussing the originally long and mutually
influential Iranian-Armenian cultural relationship.[[4]] The authors
also claim here that there have been no archaeological excavations in
Istakhr, an ideological center of the Sasanians, which is not totally
correct.[[5]]

The next new chapter, Chapter 8 ('Emperor and King of kings') is
another that deals with the further incorporation of the "Sasanian
voice" into the chronicle of Roman-Sasanian relations. Here the authors
pay particular attention to the idea of the construction of kingship in
Sasanian Iran, and its significance for then contemporary international
politics. The content of this chapter will be especially useful to
those coming from a Roman-Latin tradition. In particular, extended
reference to the Middle Persian Book of Deeds of Ardashir (Phl.
Karnamag i Artaxsher i Papagan) may herald the integration of more
Middle Persian sources into narratives involving ancient Iran and Rome,
and provides much-needed insight into the cultural milieu of Sasanian
kingship.

The last additions to the book can be found in the Appendices. Appendix
I now contains a small, but highly useful chronologically tabulated
list of the Sasanian kings side by side with their Roman counterparts
(an improvement on the German original). The authors have also
completely revised their glossary by including 11 new entries and
deleting five original entries.

Unfortunately, a number of typographical and editorial errors have
crept into the new text, artifacts of the press, and they do not
significantly detract from the otherwise high quality of the
presentation and translation. Some errors include dates (p.46, 323
should read 623) and the conflation of languages with peoples (p.216,
Hindi should read Hindus).[[6]]

More significant criticism must extend, however, to an imbalance in the
way that Roman sources tend to be accepted at least provisionally,
while reports from Arab, Persian, or Syriac traditions are typified.
Where reference is made to the latter traditions, one finds, for
instance, such statements as: "...it was typical in Eastern
historiography to record only victorious events" (p.79); "...the
oriental literature provides us with stories embellished in the typical
way." (p.43 n. 152); "...along with the typical poetic elaboration--it
is indeed reflected in the Eastern sources" (p. 237). The non-Roman
tradition is reduced, in short, to embellishment and exaggeration. What
is more confusing is that the authors also refer to the analogous
tendency of omitted defeats in Western historiography (p.57).

This imbalance only complements the ideologically insurmountable chasm
that the authors have constructed between the Sasanians and the Romans
under the aegis of an "East and West" division. It is seemingly a
continuation of the German original's "tangible eurocentrism which
taint[ed] the book's achievements"--a Eurocentrism which can be
detected even in the new chapters of the 2007 publication.[[7]]

That this has survived into the new English translation is truly
unfortunate. The creation of such broad monolithic categories severely
curtails the intellectual mobility of this work at an interpretive
level. In the quest for creating anachronistic, "natural kinds", the
authors overlook some of the defining characteristics of these
civilizations that contributed to their uniqueness. For example, to
understand Sasanian ideology is to understand that the Sasanians were
marked by their desire to connect to their perception of their Iranian
heritage. Understanding the emergence of "Eranshahr", i.e. an ideology
centered on a particular nationalistic concept--especially useful in an
analysis of relations--is perhaps more indicative of dynamic social
processes than references to the character of "the East".[[8]] Recent
research into the social history of this era provides copious evidence
for exchange between the citizens of these two polities that unveils an
extremely complex interaction of reigning ideology and contextual
pragmatics.[[9]] Instead, parallel homogeneity is preferred to
diversity -- the authors refer at one point to the "'national'
confidence of the East" (p.121), insinuating a degree of uniformity
that even their own evidence contradicts.

Hard adherence to this rhetoric results in paradox. In a work that
accommodates "non-specialists and undergraduates", this methodology, if
not given explicit justification as to its utility, may well
misrepresent a region that is in dire need of sober analysis now if
ever.

The efforts of the authors have produced a work of scholarship that
will be unquestionably useful to a wide range of scholars and initiates
in many related fields. Despite a questionable framing of the
relationship of Rome and Sasanian Iran, the authors nonetheless manage
to provide a detailed and accessible study in which they have sieved
and sorted a great deal of textual evidence and have presented it to
the reader in a clear, approachable format. The supplements to the
original German edition undoubtedly strengthen what was already a
unique, well-researched study on an oft-neglected dimension of the
overlapping Sasanian and Roman polities. While these aspects of the
book receive the greatest commendation, it remains to be seen whether
the methodology employed will find further usefulness in an area, as
Hauser remarked, "urgently" in need of a more-informed view.


------------------
Notes:


1.   E.g. recent compendia such as V. S. Curtis and S. Stewart, The
Idea of Iran Vol. 3: The Sasanian Era, (New York, 2008); R. McC. Adams
"Intensified Large-Scale Irrigation as an Aspect of Imperial Policy:
Strategies of Statecraft on the Late Sasanian Mesopotamian Plain." in
J. Marcus and C. Stanish, eds., Agricultural Strategies (Los Angeles,
2006) 17-37; R. Wenke "Western Iran in the Partho-Sasanian Period: The
Imperial Transformation" in F. Hole, ed., The Archaeology of Western
Iran (Washington D.C. 1987) 251-272.

2.   Stefan Hauser, BMCR 2002.05.06. Hauser's review is inherently
important with respect to the current state of ancient scholarship
concerning the Near East and its interaction with Europe.

3.   For a brief summary of the relevant archaeology see: J. Simpson.
Review of Sassanian Armies: The Iranian Empire, Early 3rd to mid-7th
centuries AD Antiquity 71 (1997) 242-246.

4.   Recent scholarship has illustrated that portions of the Armenian
populace, if not adherents to some form of Zoroastrianism (J. Russell,
Zoroastrianism in Armenia, [Cambridge, 1988]), continued the functional
aspects of their pre-Zoroastrian religion (A. Petrosyan, The
Pre-Christian Armenian Pantheon, Aramazd II (2007) 174-201.

5.   Istakhr was the focus of excavations by E. Herzfeld, Iran in the
Ancient Near East, (London 1941), and E. Schmidt, The treasury of
Persepolis and other discoveries in the homeland of the Achaemenians,
(Chicago, 1939).

6.   Other errors include:
Yazdgard is "the sinner" not "the infidel" (Arabic al-Athim; Middle
Persian bckly; New Persian bazehkar).
p.179 The contents of notes 29 and 30 are reversed (i.e. note 29 should
have the content of note 30 and vice versa).
p.213 "Middle Persian script" should read "Middle Persian language"
p.256 While Gundeshapur only represents a phonological evolution of
Veh-Andiyok-Shapur (and was later folk-etymologized), the translation
should still read the "army" not "weapons" of Shapur.

7.   Stefan Hauser, BMCR 2002.05.06.

8.   T. Daryaee,  Shahrestaniha i Eranshahr. A Middle Persian Text on
Late Antique Geography, Epic, and History, (Costa Mesa, 2002). See
especially, G. Gnoli "The Sassanians and the Birth of Iran" in The Idea
of Iran: An Essay on its Origins, (Rome, 1989) 129-183.

9.   J. Walker. "The Limits of Late Antiquity," Ancient World 33 (2002)
45-69. For an archaeological correlate see: E. de Bruijn and D. Dudley.
"The Humeima Hoard: Byzantine and Sasanian Coins and Jewelry from
Southern Jordan," American Journal of Archaeology 99 (1995) 683-697.