Carus' Sasanian campaign

  1. Home
  2. Wiki
Carus' invasion of the Sasanian Empire
Part of the Roman–Sasanian wars
Date283 AD
Location
Mesopotamia
Result Inconclusive
Territorial
changes		 Status quo ante bellum
Belligerents
Roman Empire Sasanian Empire
Commanders and leaders
 Bahram II
Casualties and losses
Unknown Unknown

The Sasanian campaign of Carus was a military campaign conducted by the Roman Emperor Carus against the Sasanian Empire in 283. Following Carus' accession in 282, he made his eldest son Carinus co-emperor. Leaving Carinus in charge of the western part of the empire, Carus and his younger son Numerian brought an army east into Mesopotamia, capturing Seleucia and Ctesiphon. Carus died suddenly in the summer of 283, probably of unnatural causes, leaving Numerian in command of the army; following this the Roman army withdrew from Mesopotamia, in unclear circumstances. In 284, after the death of Numerian, Diocletian was acclaimed emperor by the eastern army; he defeated Carinus and in 287 made peace with Persia.

Sources

[edit]

The study of third-century Roman history is significantly hindered by the paucity of written sources.[1] No contemporary narrative historical text on Roman history from the third or first half of the fourth century survives, and the extant texts of the period belong to a range of genres.[2] The immediate decade after Aurelian's death in 275 is especially lacking in any contemporary sources.[3] The literary sources for the reign of Carus and his sons provide only a general framework for the events of the period; a significant number of them likely reflect the official narrative of the Diocletianic period, particularly in their accounts of the deaths of Carus and Numerian, and they provide limited details regarding the course of Carus' Persian war.[4]

Only one fragment of a contemporary literary source is extant in the form of Nemesianus' Cynegetica, where the poet glorifies the military successes of Carus' sons.[5] More substantial literary sources exist from the second half of the fourth century, including the epitomes of Aurelius Victor, Festus, Eutropius, and the Epitome de Caesaribus. The Historia Augusta provides an unreliable but detailed account of the reign of Carus and his sons, but only brief accounts for Carus' Persian war.[6] Literary sources of the sixth century include the Historia Nova of Zosimus, but surviving details for the reign of Carus are limited, and the chronicler Malalas is unreliable. Later Byzantine authors, including Zonaras, also have significance, particularly due to the limited state of source transmission.[7] Many of the literary sources draw upon a hypothesised lost fourth-century work of imperial history known as the Kaisergeschichte.[8] Further sources of transmission likely include the lost work of Nicomachus Flavianus, possibly dating to the end of the fourth century, and the work of pagan historian Eunapius of Sardis, which has only survived in fragments.[9]

Outside of narrative history, significant references to the period are present in rhetoric and legal literature in the form of the Panegyrici Latini and Codex Iustinianus, in addition to the poetry of Nemesianus. The Codex Iustinianus includes 28 rescripts for the reigns of Carus and his sons.[10] Inscriptions, papyri, and coinage also inform the reconstruction of their reigns.[11]

Historical context

[edit]
Minted coin of Carus.

The death of Severus Alexander in AD 235 was followed by a fifty-year period of major disruption to the Roman empire: its chief characteristic was war, civil and foreign, with over fifty individuals claiming the title of emperor while the frontiers were commonly subject to invasion.[12] Between 249 and 268, Rome experienced more devastating usurpations and military defeats than at any other point since the beginning of the principate, and the empire itself was fragmented between 260 and 274. It was a period of political, economic, and military crisis, in which Rome underwent territorial losses and enemy raids that reached the interior of the empire.[13] The invasions of Shapur I were among the numerous challenges Rome was faced with during the period and among the most significant.[14] A period of military recovery eventually began in 268 and the unity of the empire was restored under the reigns of the soldier-emperors who succeeded Gallienus.[15] Aurelian achieved the unification of the empire and Probus had a similarly active reign fighting barbarian threats, as Rome's inability to control its frontiers ensured he had to.[16] The underlying weaknesses of the Roman state persisted under both emperors, and the erosion of confidence in the military precipitated further challenges on the frontiers.[17] However, relations with the Sasanians since Shapur's final campaign were uneventful despite the unrest in the east caused by the secessionist Palmyrene empire.[18] Following the capture of Valerian in 260, Shapur I did not repeat any comparative success over the remaining years of his reign. Odaenathus’ reconquests in Mesopotamia and advances into Persia preceded the King of King’s own death in 270; thereafter the Sasanian empire entered a period of instability and successive changes of ruler. When Bahram II succeeded his father in 276, Sasanian interests had likely already been compelled away from the west.[19]

Foreign invasions and civil strife persisted throughout the reigns of Carus' immediate predecessors but they were routinely successful in defending the empire's frontiers and maintaining order.[20] In 281, Probus visited Rome where he celebrated a triumph before moving east.[21] In 282, dissatisfaction within the Roman army culminated in his praetorian prefect Carus rebelling against him. Probus' attempt to counter him failed, as the troops he sent against him defected to Carus' side. Between September and December, Probus was killed by his own soldiers in Sirmium, and Carus was declared emperor by the end of the year. While he did not go to Rome for senatorial ratification, his son, Carinus, went in his stead. From the accession of Carus onwards, the senate's role in imperial succession was permanently diminished.[22]

War with the Sasanians had become a Roman imperial priority during the latter part of Aurelian's reign, but his assassination in 275 ensured the campaign never came to fruition; plans from his immediate successors were similarly cut short.[23] Probus had also been preparing for an invasion of Persia in 282 before he too fell victim to Carus' mutiny. The following year, with Carus leading the army assembled by his predecessor, this long-awaited invasion was set in motion.[24] While exact motivations for the war remain uncertain, it was primarily one of vengeance for the defeats inflicted by Shapur I in previous decades, providing legitimacy for the emperor while restoring Rome's reputation and standing in the east.[25][26] Securing Roman territory was also a possible motivator. Although the Sasanians had likely been absent from the province of Mesopotamia following Odaenathus' offensive,[27] Persian incursions may have occurred prior to Carus' invasion.[28] Restoring Roman influence in the kingdom of Armenia, which had been under Persian suzerainty for decades, may also have been a secondary aim of the campaign.[29] A likely contributing factor in Carus' decision to invade in 283 was the Sasanian empire's internal instability: Hormizd, brother of Persian king Bahram II, had led an insurrection in the eastern half of Persia, rendering the empire vulnerable in the west.[30]

In early 283, Carus and Numerian moved east towards Persia, leaving Carinus to take charge of the western provinces.[31] On their way east, Carus led a brief and successful campaign against the Sarmatians along the Danube.[32] They then proceeded to Antioch in spring of 283, a frequent base of operations for previous campaigns against the Parthians and Sasanians.[33] At this juncture, Carinus was likely elevated to the rank of Augusti,[34] possibly in connection to his victory on the Rhine against the Germans, for which both Carinus and Carus were awarded the title Germanicus Maximus.[35]

In late spring, with preparations for the invasion complete, Carus led the Roman forces from Antioch and thence across the Persian frontiers.[36]

War

[edit]
Map of Ctesiphon.

While the exact route taken by Carus is uncertain, he likely led the Roman forces across the Euphrates, before following the river downstream and continuing along the Royal Canal to the Tigris.[37] This same route was taken by Gordian III in 243 and later by Julian in 363.[36] The composition of the army assembled for the campaign is unknown but it may have been similar to the forces led by Aurelian against Palmyra in 272.[38] The army's southeasterly march towards Ctesiphon was swift,[39] and they encountered minimal resistance as they passed through southern Mesopotamia.[40]

The Romans faced more significant resistance along the Royal Canal, shortly before they reached Seleucia, during the siege and capture of the city of Meinas Sabatha.[41] Meinas Sabatha is likely identifiable with the ruined settlement later referenced by Ammianus Marcellinus:[42] "a deserted city destroyed in former days by the emperor Carus".[43] It was midsummer when Carus, leading the Roman forces, reached Seleucia and the Sasanian capital, Ctesiphon, which lay directly across the Tigris.[44] Both cities were subsequently captured.[45]

In a report unique to Zonaras, the Persians attempted to repel the Romans by diverting a river into their encampment:[46] "But the army of the Romans had a close brush with danger. For they were encamped in a gully, and the Persians, when they observed this, by means of a trench diverted toward the gully the river flowing nearby. But Carus charged the Persians, met with success, and routed them."[47] The diversion of rivers was an established defense measure employed in Mesopotamia,[48] and Zonaras' report may have related to a battle in connection to the sieges of Ctesiphon and Coche.[49] While Carus captured Ctesiphon, Bahram II was likely engaged in suppressing a rebellion in the east and was unable to mount an effective defense of his capital.[50]

Divus Carus Antoninianus 284 2170395

The invasion marked the first successful Roman campaign into southern Mesopotamia by a reigning emperor since Septimius Severus' Parthian war in 197/198.[51] Carus assumed the titles Parthicus, Persicus, and Persicus Maximus following the capture of Ctesiphon. In Nemesianus' Cynegetica, the Carthaginian poet notes the capture of "the time-honoured citadels of Babylon", indicating that news of Carus' conquest of the Sasanian capital was widely disseminated throughout the empire in the months that followed.[52]

Withdrawal

[edit]

Carus' death

[edit]

In July, while encamped beyond the Tigris near Ctesiphon, Carus died.[53] Most ancient sources report that he was struck by lightning.[54] The authors of the Latin breviaries of the fourth century all report this cause of death, likely drawing from the hypothetical Kaisergeschichte.[55] Some of these accounts, written in the aftermath of Julian's campaign in 363, accused Carus of immodesty and defiance of the gods, culminating in his death by lightning; Julian was similarly criticised for ignoring prophetic advice and omens.[56] Various Christian and Byzantine authors report the same cause of death.[57] Over subsequent centuries, his unique manner of death continued to fascinate the Romans, entering into the poetry of Claudian and Sidonius Apollinaris.[58] In addition to a lightning strike, some sources report a death by illness.[59] In another Byzantine variant, Carus is said to have died campaigning against the Huns following his victory over Persia. In the chronicle of Malalas, the Sarmatians are erroneously identified as the Huns in an anachronistic conflation echoed by later Byzantine writers.[60]

Despite the prevalence of the account within the sources, a lightning strike in southern Mesopotamia in the summer is virtually impossible.[61] Carus was in his sixties when he died and most scholarly hypotheses for his death involve assassination by a cabal of senior officers, wounds, or natural causes, with no consensus.[62] While some ancient sources report that Carus had resolved to advance further into Persia,[63] his immediate objectives after the capture of the Sasanian capital are unclear.[64] Upon the death of his father, Numerian was declared Augustus and the Romans started to withdraw. An imperial rescript dated to either 8 September or December attests to his later presence back in Syria in the city of Emesa.[65]

Numerian's death

[edit]
Relief Bahram II

After Carus' death, Numerian’s activity as co-emperor in the east is unclear; the majority of sources only report of his return in a litter through Asia Minor.[51] However, another imperial rescript dated March 18 supports his continued presence in Emesa over the winter and early spring of the following year.[66] Like his father, he assumed the title Persicus Maximus, with its earliest attestation being from 284.[67] By the summer Numerian had returned to Antioch, where aurei and antoniniani were struck to compensate the soldiers. Consecration issues for Carus and coins denoting victory were minted in large quantities at Tripoli and Antioch.[68] The Latin sources indicate that no further hostilities occurred between Rome and Persia under Numerian. However, later Byzantine texts claim a resumption of conflict took place following the death of Carus.[69] Some of these accounts claim that Numerian suffered a defeat, while epigraphic and numismatic evidence conversely suggests that Numerian achieved success over the Sasanians in 284.[70] The Byzantine accounts of further conflict are usually disregarded or not held to be credible by scholars.[71] Some scholars also believe the relief at Naqsh-e Rostam represents a Sasanian claim of victory following the withdrawal of the Roman forces, though this interpretation has been disputed.[72]

In late 284, Numerian slowly travelled west accompanied by the forces employed during the campaign. Due to an eye ailment he travelled in a closed and curtained litter. As the army approached Chalcedon in Bithynia, Numerian died. According to most of the literary sources, he was murdered by his father-in-law, Aper.[73] Several sources report that his death was initially concealed and only discovered once the stench of his decomposing body began to emanate from his litter.[74] After his death was officially announced to the army, the leading officers elected not to recognise Carinus as Augustus any longer. With the army assembled in Nicomedia on 20 November, Diocletian was proclaimed emperor and Aper executed.[75] While Numerian's death by Aper is often considered credible by scholars, his culpability is commonly questioned.[76]

Aftermath

[edit]

After Numerian's death and Diocletian's acclamation, Carinus marched east.[77] A succession war followed, which saw Carinus defeat another rival, Sabinus Julianus, before he was also killed in summer 285. Diocletian negotiated a peace with the Sasanians a few years later in 287–88 which saw pro-Roman Tiridates III installed in a possibly-partitioned Armenia, though this reconstruction has been disputed.[78] Rome claimed victory in the negotiations. The settlement in 287 did not long hold, however, as conflict with the Sasanians resumed some nine years later in 296.[79]

Carus' attack on the Persians constituted an episode of gradual military recovery that had been underway from the reign of Gallienus through to the acclamation of Diocletian.[80] Following previous defeats against the Persians earlier in the third century it was celebrated by the Romans across the empire, and judged equal to the Parthian campaigns of Trajan, Verus, and Severus by later writers.[81] Its impact in Roman memory was lasting as was the account of Carus' apparent death by lightning, which gained greater fame in the fourth century than it did in the third.[82] But with the withdrawal of the army following his death and without the conclusion of any treaty, the state of relations between the two powers remained unchanged.[83] Whether Carus' victories led to the favourable Diocletianic settlement in 287 is unclear: Bahram II in the early 280s continued to face rebellion in the Sasanian east and he may have given concessions to Rome for a free hand against the rebels.[84]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Southern 2001, p. 7.
  2. ^ Edwell 2021, p. 4.
  3. ^ Potter 2004, pp. 271–272.
  4. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 38–39, 100.
  5. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 27.
  6. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 29–31.
  7. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 33–35.
  8. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 36–37.
  9. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 30, 37.
  10. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 34, 38.
  11. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 47.
  12. ^ Drinkwater 2005, p. 28.
  13. ^ de Blois 2019, pp. 93–94.
  14. ^ Edwell 2021, pp. 58, 86–87.
  15. ^ de Blois 2019, p. 255.
  16. ^ Potter 2004, pp. 271–273.
  17. ^ Potter 2004, pp. 273–274.
  18. ^ Bleckmann 1992, p. 130.
  19. ^ Potter 2004, pp. 285–286.
  20. ^ de Blois 2019, pp. 255–256.
  21. ^ Potter 2004, p. 274.
  22. ^ Southern 2001, p. 132.
  23. ^ Edwell 2021, p. 128.
  24. ^ Potter 2004, pp. 274–275.
  25. ^ Potter 2004, pp. 274–275; Edwell 2021, p. 128.
  26. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 97, citing Nem. Cyn., 72.
  27. ^ Bleckmann 1992, pp. 130–131; Altmayer 2014, p. 94; Edwell 2021, p. 135. Some scholars, including Kreucher 2003, p. 161, question the extent of Roman control: "Long-term possession of Mesopotamia was only achieved by Rome through Diocletian (or Galerius) in 298 after further military conflict."
  28. ^ Luther 2006, p. 213, considers an occupation in 282–283 as uncertain but conceives of raids in north Mesopotamia, as does Altmayer 2014, pp. 96–97. Hartmann 2022, p. 23, citing Aur. Vic. Caes., 38.2, and HA Car., 8.1, conceives of a Sasanian occupation of parts of northern Mesopotamia following Probus' death.
  29. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 96–99, 114–115.
  30. ^ Edwell 2021, p. 128; Hartmann 2022, pp. 28–29, citing HA Car., 8.1, Eutr., 9.18.1, and Pan. Lat., 11 (3) 17.2.
  31. ^ Southern 2001, pp. 132–133.
  32. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 83–85, citing HA Car., 9.4.
  33. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 30.
  34. ^ Southern 2001, p. 132; Altmayer 2014, p. 94.
  35. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 102.
  36. ^ a b Altmayer 2014, p. 103.
  37. ^ Hartmann 2022, pp. 30–31; Altmayer 2014, pp. 103–4.
  38. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 296–99. Per Altmayer's reconstruction, it likely consisted of detachments from Danubian legions and possibly the Rhine, cavalry of the imperial field army, mounted guard forces and campaign detachments of the praetorian guard, with further detachments from eastern legions and auxiliary troops.
  39. ^ de Blois 2019, p. 93; Altmayer 2014, p. 104.
  40. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 104, citing Fest., 24, HA Car., 8.1.
  41. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 104.
  42. ^ Bleckmann 1992, p. 133; Altmayer 2014, p. 104.
  43. ^ Amm. Res Gest., 24.5.4.
  44. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 31; Altmayer 2014, p. 104.
  45. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 104, citing, among others, Nem. Cyn., 72, Eutr., 9.18.1, and Fest., 24. Altmayer and Hartmann 2022, p. 31, both identify the captured cities as Ctesiphon and Seleucia's successor settlement, Coche. Millar 1993, p. 176, and Williams 2000, p. 33, identify the captured cities as Seleucia and Ctesiphon.
  46. ^ Bleckmann 1992, p. 133; Altmayer 2014, p. 105.
  47. ^ Zon., 12.30.
  48. ^ Bleckmann 1992, p. 134, citing Xen. Anab., 2.3.13., and Dio. Sic., XVIII, 73.3.
  49. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 105; Bleckmann 1992, p. 133, suggests Zonaras' anecdote derives from a report detailing conflict around Ctesiphon.
  50. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 31; Altmayer 2014, p. 105.
  51. ^ a b Altmayer 2014, p. 14.
  52. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 27, 106–7.
  53. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 107–8.
  54. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 21.
  55. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 37, citing, Aur. Vic. Caes., 38.3; Eutr., 9.18.1; Fest., 24.2; Epit. de Caes., 38.3.
  56. ^ Edwell 2021, pp. 125–26, citing, Aur. Vic. Caes., 38.2–4; Fest., 24.2.
  57. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 37, citing, among others, Jer. Chron., 2300; Oros., 7.24.4; Zon., 12.30.
  58. ^ Hartmann 2022, pp. 37–38, citing, Claud. Epith. Pal et Cel., 25; Sidon. Carm., 23.91–96.
  59. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 122–23, citing, among others, HA Car., 8.3, and Leo, 81.
  60. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 42, citing, among others, Mal., 12.34, and Zon., 12.30.
  61. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 125.
  62. ^ Bird 1976, p. 125 contends that Diocletian orchestrated his murder; Southern 2001, p. 133, considers murder by Aper or a natural death; Potter 2004, p. 275, suggests an assassination by his senior officers; Kreucher 2008, p. 419 suspects an illness or war wound; Altmayer 2014, pp. 126–28, concludes that he died of natural causes; Hartmann 2022, pp. 54–59 believes he fell victim to a conspiracy of his Illyrian officers.
  63. ^ Aur. Vic. Caes., 38,3–5; HA Car., 9, 1–3; Fest., 24.
  64. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 108, 120–122, contends that the primary objective of the campaign was achieved with the capture of Ctesiphon, and that the reports served as literary devices in ascribing Carus' death to divine punishment. Hartmann 2022, p. 59, believes his intention to advance further resulted in his assassination.
  65. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 108–10.
  66. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 111.
  67. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 116.
  68. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 117–118.
  69. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 34, citing, among others, Mal., 12.35, and Zon., 12.30.
  70. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 111, 116–19, believes this may have included the temporary restoration of Roman influence in Armenia.
  71. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 34 n. 40: "Mostly, the accounts of the Byzantine authors are not considered or are regarded as unhistorical".
  72. ^ Shahbazi 2004, believes the relief depicts a Sasanian claim of victory over Carus and Numerian, as does Kreucher 2008, p. 420, who believes Numerian was likely forced into a retreat following the death of his father. Altmayer 2014, pp. 112–113 and Hartmann 2022, pp. 112–13 dispute this interpretation.
  73. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 132, citing, among others, Aur. Vic. Caes., 38.6; Eutr., 9.18.2; Oros., 7.24.4.
  74. ^ Altmayer 2014, p. 133.
  75. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 36, also placing Aper's death after Diocletian's accession. Altmayer 2014, pp. 132–136, however, places Aper's death prior to Diocletian's acclamation.
  76. ^ Hartmann 2022, p. 35 n. 41, deems it likely defamation of the historiography of the Tetrarchic-Constantinian period, but notes that it is "often regarded as historical" in his survey of the scholarship. Altmayer 2014, pp. 138, also refutes Aper's involvement: "this has rightly been repeatedly questioned", 141: "Numerian most likely died of natural causes, whereby the eye ailment mentioned in the literary sources is to be regarded as a symptom of a more serious disease with a fatal course".
  77. ^ Potter 2004, pp. 275–276.
  78. ^ Presenting Tiridates III's installation c. 287: Daryaee 2009, p. 12; Potter 2004, p. 651 n. 151 (arguing against Kettenhofen's chronology); Edwell 2021, pp. 134–35; Hellström 2023. Some scholars dispute this. Weber 2016, for example, believes that Armenia was a Persian vassal through the settlement in 298, citing Kettenhofen, Erich (1995), Tirdād und die Inschrift von Paikuli: Kritik der Quellen zur Geschichte Armeniens im späten 3. und frühen 4. Jh. n. Chr., Wiesbaden: Reichert.
  79. ^ Hellström 2023.
  80. ^ de Blois 2019, pp. 255–257.
  81. ^ Altmayer 2014, pp. 119, 180.
  82. ^ Southern 2001, pp. 143, 330 n. 75.
  83. ^ Frye 2005, p. 470.
  84. ^ Edwell 2021, pp. 134 ("Bahram was dealing with a serious revolt in the east led by Hormizd at the time of Carus' invasion in 283 and with the continuation of these difficulties, he likely had little choice but to strike the agreement with Diocletian"), 249 ("The agreement between Diocletian and Bahram... demonstrated the extent of the difficulties Bahram faced [as to] the rebellion of Hormizd in the east").

Bibliography

[edit]

Secondary sources

[edit]

Primary sources

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]