f

ailed Dara, the

it Anastasiopolis

a the Byzantine

rtably testimony

Persian territory,

new foundation

s of the Persian

is city-citadel is

rth-eastern Iran,

> I. And if the

e for an Achae-

)aras was also a

ice for the Per-

ly, but also his

: captured it in

i.D. 604, Parvlz

•ice and assured

's Christian cel-

1 shrine and in

: locality and it

:ance known to

iristian shrine M>.

imes the site of

?ry over Achae-

me manner un-

>st the Batde of

Salvatore Cosentino

IRANIAN CONTINGENTS IN BYZANTINE ARMY'*'

Probably many scholars would agree, today, that the "barbarization" of

Roman army is some sort of ambiguous and elusive concept. The ambiguity,

of course, is not concerning the chronological development to which this

definition refers, nor the different stages stressing such a development. The

recruitment of barbarians - that is non-Roman citizens - in the Roman

army was a very gradual process starting from the 2nd century A.D., which

rapidly increased after the batde of Adrianople (378). From the point of

view of its political nature, it began to play a remarkable role only by the

promotion of barbarian leaders at the top of the palatinae and comitatenses

units under the reign of Constantine the Great11' (324-337). If the general

background in which this process developed seems quite clear, on the

contrary not few difficulties arise as soon as one tries to submit it to a

closer examination. Taken as a whole, modern historiography seems to

maintain that "barbarization" chiefly means "germanization'VSuch is, for

instance, the authoritative position held by A. H. M. Jones in his Later

Roman Empire®, which may have influenced many scholars. The special

emphasis on the German element is a consequence of historiographical

interest being traditionally focused more on the West than on the eastern

empire. However, since the fourth century the role played by the Arab

troops in the Oriens, for example, seems not negligible, as it has been

stressed by Irfan Shahid (3). During the fifth and the sixth century the

recruitment in the East must have been based more on Illyrians, Isaurians,

Arabs, Armenians, Caucasians, Turks, Iranians'4 ' than on Germans. Military

srsian King, Dara,

the Greek sigma.

tes.

(*> I would like to thank Prof. W.E. Kaegi for helpful advice on this paper.

»> Cf. Carrie 1995, p. 50.

<2 > Jones 1964, II, p. 619.

<3) Shahid 1984, pp. 465-521.

(4) Whitby 2000, p. 301 speaks of a «variety of sources, which ensured that no single

group could dominate*.

246

history too speaks in favour of a non massive germanization of army

in the pars Orientis. As a matter of fact, it is well known that in the

course of the Late Antiquity cavalry and archery came to acquire a more

prominent tactical role than infantry; both cavalry and archery were two

military specializations in which the Germans did not excel according to

the Strategicon by Maurice. The same notion of "German" has been

undergone a deep revision since the sixties of the last century. The ethnic

structures of the Germanic peoples in the age of the Volkerwanderungen

were not at all cohesive in their identities'5'. They were formed by groups

of clans gathered around the families of their kings lacking of any form

of ethnical homogeneity. Tribal confederations were based on linguistic

and cultural affinities and on the capability of their leaders to attract

under their rule other groups by means of military enterprises. Some

tribes, as the Sarmatians or the Alans, intermixed deeply with the Goths,

even though they spoke an Iranian idiom.

Also from a cultural viewpoint the concept of "barbarization" shows

some degree of ambiguity. In a recent contribution, M. Whitby (6) has

argued that the barbarians who were enrolled in the army were not less

"civilised" (in a broader sense) than the majority of Romans coming

from the less developed areas of the empire. Here the aspect of barba-

rization is not clearly distinguishable from the most general theme of

the birth of a military culture in Late Antiquity. According to J. M.

Carrie the main feature of such a culture would have been represented

by a mentality being inclined to emphasize a technocratic and active

way of doing (7), in opposition to the ideals of "measure" and contem-

plative life carried on by the Roman senatorial nobility. If such is the

case, it must be underlined that some elements of contrast between mil-

itary and senatorial mentality take place since the third century - and

therefore, before the massive penetration of barbarians into Roman army.

The Historia Augusta sketches in a very ironical manner the personality

of Macrinus (217-218), a soldier of equestrian origins coming from the

Illyricum. In order to imitate the behaviour of the upper class, which

was shaped on the stoic ideals of calm and impassibility, the emperor

was used to speak in a so low voice during his public audiences that

nobody was able to hear him®. Herodianus qualified the emperor Max-

iminus the Thracian (235-238) as a ni2;o|3dQ|3aQoc; just because he was

(5) Cf. Heather 1998; Pohl 2000, p. 4.

(6) Whitby 1995, p. 104.

(7) Carrie 1986, p. 486. For a later period see also Carile 1986.

(8) Brown 1992, p. 881.

born in a vilk

presence of ge

may have comsociety by the

this latter took

lemics in Late

its contents an

rusticity of th

monks <10). On

the fashion of

as Ostrogothic

be very sensitr

the privileges

Even more

the broader so

in the passage

known, the pr

crucial worries

experimented

militaris, stipe)

also in this cai

whole body o

fourth century

allowance of 1

(that is native

must have rep

Roman admini

same importan

empire, probab

in the perspec

century. Settinj

was carried ou

ture of terribl

and Cassiodon

manner by wl

<9 > RUGGINI 19

< 10) RUGGINI T

<n > See Szidat

< 12 > CTh VII

<»> Cf. Cass.

;ation of army

vn that in the

icquire a more

hery were two

A according to

tan" has been

ary. The ethnic

erwanderungen

ned by groups

tg of any form

d on linguistic

ders to attract

srprises. Some

rith the Goths,

ization" shows

Whitby (6> has

' were not less

omans coming

pect of barba-

leral theme of

rding to J. M.

en represented

itic and active

' and contem-

If such is the

t between mil-

century - and

) Roman army,

the personality

ning from the

:r class, which

r, the emperor

audiences that

emperor Max-

ecause he was

247

born in a village on the Thracian frontier (9). Doubdess, the increasing

presence of gentiles in the army from the fourth to the sixth century

may have contributed to enlarge the influence exerted on the Roman

society by the military mentality; it is very questionable, however, that

this latter took rise only from the barbarization. The anti-barbarian po-

lemics in Late Antiquity joined both pagans and Christian authors and

its contents are never the same. For the learned Eunapius of Sardi the

rusticity of the barbarians was not less unbearable than that of the

monks (10). On the other hand, not all the soldiers were indifferent to

the fashion of the culture of Roman elites. For instance Theoderic, that

as Ostrogothic king was especially a military leader, showed himself to

be very sensitive towards the classical legacy of Rome and respectful to

the privileges of senate for the most part of his reign.

Even more inadequate is the concept of barbarization with regards to

the broader socio-economical transformations of the Mediterranean world

in the passage from the Late Antiquity to early Byzantium. As it is well

known, the problem of how to supply the army was one of the most

crucial worries of the late Roman rulers, for the solution of which they

experimented several systems since the Diocletian's fiscal reform {annona

militaris, stipendia in cash, donativa, coemptiones, military lands). But

also in this case, the main protagonist of these transformations was the

whole body of the army, not the barbarians. It is true that since the

fourth century they constituted the object of special measures, as the

allowance of land to the laeti in Italy and Gaul (11),or to the gentiles

(that is natives) along the African limes{n)

. These measures, however,

must have represented only a small part of the initiatives taken by the

Roman administration for the solution of how to supply the army. The

same importance of the hospitalitas system in the western part of the

empire, probably might turn out to be exaggerated by scholars if analysed

in the perspective of long duree, that is from the fourth to the seventh

century. Setting aside the problem of the real means through which it

was carried out, the sources do not seem to handle down to us a pic-

ture of terrible upheavals of contemporary Gaul and Italy. Ennodius

and Cassiodorus (13) praise the praefectus praetorio Liberatus for the good

manner by which he gave lands of Roman landowners to the Goths

(9) Ruggini 1984, p. 18.

(10) Ruggini 1984, p. 46.

<n > See Szidat 1995.

< 12 > CTh VII 15, 1.

< 13 > Cf. Cass. Var. II, 16; Enn. Epp. IX, 23.

— 248 —

during the Odoacer's regime. If it is true that this evidence is surely

pervaded with a purpose of pro-Theoderic propaganda, it not less true

that the accommodation of Germans in the fifth century Italy can hard-

ly have represented a dramatic event for its society. Otherwise, we could

not explain why both Ennodius and Cassiodorus have chosen a similar

argument for supporting Theoderic's rulership to the eyes of the senato-

rial aristocracy.

From the brief considerations made above, the concept of "barba-

rization" of the Roman army emerges as a sort of distorting mirror for

its observer. Its general features seem clear; but every time one tries to

penetrate into them, their implications with the social tissue of the world

of Late Antiquity are so close that they can barely be singled out as

autonomous phenomena.

The Iranian recruitment - giving to the adjective "Iranian" a basical-

ly linguistic, not political nor ethnical, meaning - into Roman army does

not seem having left substantial traces in our sources before the third

century. By using the detailed study of G. Forni (14) on the geographical

origins of the legionarii or the prosopography made by F. Devijver (15) on

the equestrian officers, we do not find any name which can be traced

to an Iranian onomastics. After conquering Ctesiphon in 197 or 198,

Septimius Severus (AD 193-211), constituted three new legions, the I, II

and III Parthica, of which the I and the III were left in Mesopotamia

as presidium of the new province. We know that the legio I was quar-

tered at Singara; maybe the legio III at Rhesaenaem'. The existence of a

cavalry squadron of Oshroeni quartered at Apadana in the third centu-

ry, depending from the legio I, has been hypothesized on the basis of

an inscription <17). It is possible, therefore, in view of the proximity of

the quartering areas to the Parthian (after Sasanian) territory, that dur-

ing the third century these legions may have attracted some Iranian re-

cruits (Parthians, Khurds or Persians). Herodianus states that in the

Severus Alexandrer's campaign of 234-235 against the Germans there

were some oriental auxilia of Oshroeni, Armenians, Parthians <18). In 337

Constantine or Constantius II is said to have received in the Roman

territory about 300.000 Sarmatians, who were scattered by him in Thra-

<14) See Form 1953, Appendix B and C; see also Form 1992, pp. 64-141.

(15) Devijver 1986.

(16) Form 1953, p. 94; Mann 1983, p. 44; Isaac 1992, p. 360, nn. 169-170.

<17> Gnoli 2000, pp. 106-109.

<18) Herod. 6, 7, 8; 7, 1, 9 e 2, 1; H. A. vit. Alex. Sev. 61, 8 and Max. 11, 7; both

quoted by Gabba 1974, p. 34, n. 83.

cia, Scythia, Mimentions the napartially at leasl

clibanarii Parthi,

et secundi (two

magistri militum' latina under th(

\forces at the di

the legio sexta

qualified as psei

merly limitanei,

ala prima Parthi

;nae {2i)

. In the ^

niores and the

the magister eqi

This does n

nomenclature qi

have been comimprobable. The

\Parthii. In this (

of clibanarius (G

from a Persian

the meaning of

be, the differen

clibanarius and

article written ii

convincingly, th

I

fighters'26

'. The

from the head

protected by a l

horseman riding

(19) See the enti

<20) Not. dign., (

' (21) Not. dign., (

1(22

> Not. dign., (

'' (23) Not. dign.,

early imperial time,

(24) Not. dign., (

I

<23 » See Bivar l1

can be found.(26) Eadie 1967,

; p. 28, n. 66.

lence is surely

t not less true

[taly can hard-

vise, we could

osen a similar

of the senato-

:pt of "barba-

ing mirror for

ie one tries to

2 of the world

singled out as

ian" a basical-

lan army does

fore the third

2 geographical

Devijver (15) on

can be traced

197 or 198,

ions, the I, II

Mesopotamia

o I was quar-

existence of a

s third centu-

i the basis of

proximity of

ory, that dur-

le Iranian re-

> that in the

rermans there

ms (18). In 337

i the Romanhim in Thra-

141.

9-170.

Max. 11, 7; both

— 249 —

cia, Scythia, Macedonia and northern Italy <19). The Notitia dignitatum

mentions the names of several reparts which might have been composed,

partially at least, by Iranians. In the East we find a corps of equites

clibanarii Parthi, composed by three squadrons, that is the equites primi

et secundi (two vexillationes comitatenses under the command of the two

magistri militum praesentales) {20) and the equites quarti (a vexillatio pa-

latina under the magister militum per Orientem) (2l). Always among the

forces at the disposal of the magister militum per Orientem are listed

the legio sexta Parthica and the legio Transtigritana {22), two formations

qualified as pseudocomitatenses . This means that their soldiers were for-

merly limitanei, who later had received the status of comitatenses. Anala prima Parthorum is assigned under the orders of the dux Osrhroe-

nae (2i). In the West the Notitia mentions the equites sagittarii Parthi se-

niores and the equites sagittarii Parthi iuniores among the forces under

the magister equitum praesentalis {24\

This does not mean, of course, that simply on the basis of the

nomenclature quoted in the Notitia, all the above mentioned units must

have been composed by Iranians. On the contrary, this seems highly

improbable. The only possible exception is the one of the equites clibanarii

Parthii. In this case we are dealing with a very high technical term, that

of clihanarius (Greek >di|3avdcaoc;). Specialists have judged it as originating

from a Persian etymology, *grwpan that is, literally "neck-guard" with

the meaning of "life-preserver" (i.e. the armour) <25). Whatever it may

be, the difference existing in the military Roman vocabulary between

clihanarius and cataphractus must be emphasized. In a well-documented

article written in 1967 John W Eadie has demonstrated, in my opinion

convincingly, that these two terms refer to two different figures of

fighters'26

'. The first one, the clihanarius, denotes a rider heavy armoured

from the head to the knees, mounting an horse which is, in its turn,

protected by a mail; the second one, the cataphractus, describes a mailed

horseman riding a horse without protection. Now, we very well know

<19) See the entry "Sarmatae" in Re 2. R., by K. Kretschmer, c. 2547.(20) Not. dign., Or. V, 40; Or. VI, 40.

(21) Not. dign., Or. VII, 32. .

'

(22) Not. dign., Or. VII, 55, 58.(23) Not. dign., Or. XXXV, 30; an unit with the same name is already mentioned in

early imperial time, see Gabba 1974, p. 36, n. 90.

(24) Not. dign., Occ. VI, 68, 73.(25) See BrvAE 1972, p. 277, n. 28, where other etymologies on the term "clibanarius"

can be found.(26) Eadie 1967, p. 170; on this point, quite skeptical is the opinon by Gabba 1974,

p. 28, n. 66.

Jl

250

that the Iranian world, since the Achaemenian times, had developed a

military tradition of an heavy armoured cavalry, deriving it from the

Sarmatians. Plenty of evidence of that can be found in the repertory of

images of horsemen depicted on reliefs, graffiti, coins, sculptures, luxury

objects which has been analysed in 1972 by Bivar (27). As to the written

sources, Heliodorus in his Aethiopica give us a detailed description of the

Sasanian clibanariusm . According to Eadie the mailed Roman cavalry, onthe contrary, was never able to develop an armoured force comparable

to the one of the Parthians or the Sasanians. The famous companies of

equites Dalmatae or the promoti created by Gallienus, for example, wereun-armoured riders (29)

. In order to organize an efficacious squadron of

clibanarii it needed to have first of all a special kind of extremely resistant

horses, which had to be able to carry the weight of the horseman's armourand that of their own protections. Then, a strong military training for

the rider was needed, which had to be able to violendy charge the

enemy without loosing his stability. Such a thing was not easy at all,

especially because until the end of the sixth century the horsemen did

not use stirrups. In short, one has to be a very skilful and well-equipped

rider for fighting as a clibanarius. For such a reason, it does seem not

unreasonable to think that the units of equites clibanarii Parthi listed in

the Notitia were recruited among individuals coming from Parthia,

Armenia or Oshroene.

The first unquestionable mention of a Persian contingent serving in the

Roman army is still found in the Notitia dignitatum: we are talking about

the equites Persae clibanarii, a vexillatio palatina under the command of

the magister equitum praesentalis of Constantinople 00'. The hypothesis can

be made that this unit originally was formed by the troops who fled fromPersia to Roman territory with prince Hormizd, the §abuhr IPs brother,

during the reign of Constantine I (324-337). Hormizd was used by the

emperors Constantius II and Julian for challenging the political legitimacy

of the "King of kings" and, by judging from the survived evidence, he is

thought to be well integrated into Roman society 011. He accompanied

Constantius II in Rome in the year 357; in 363 he took part in Julian's

expedition against Persia, serving as leader of the left wing of the Romancavalry. His son, Hormizd - he bore the same name of his father - was

appointed pro™have become aHormizd froman elite unit, fo

by Roman genei

been important

and strategic pi

were similar to

beginning of se

prefer to achiev

orderly approadDennis) 03

'. This

Roman commanthe Roman's on<

foundation of it!

Because of a

the more a conf

mence, the morwere increasing,

many reasons: fii

then, economical

ical survival, for

ing from the sec

one hundred yea

find a major pr

peculiar onomat<

individuals. Betwi

scutariorum tribu

capture the Armrank of magister t.

the catholic bish

383/384 we find

Narses <37), althougl

408 and 410 is qi

(27) See supra, n. 25. On the Sasanian cavalry see Widengeen 1976, pp. 287-292. See

also the article of Garsoian 1992, pp. 385-395 and Schippmann 1990, pp. 104-105.(28) Heliod. 9, 15 (ed. by A. Colonna, Torino 1987, pp. 506-507).(29) Eadie 1967, p. 168.

(30) Not. dign., Or. VI, 32.(31) See Plre I, p. 443, s.v. Hormisdas 2.

(32) Plre I, pp. 44(33) Maur. Strut. X(34) On the Sasanii

(35> See Plre I, p.

(36) Plre I, p. 803.<37) Plre I, pp. 61i

(38) Plre II, pp. 1]

251 —

d developed a

g it from the

te repertory of

lptures, luxury

to the written

icription of the

lan cavalry, on

ce comparable

; companies of

example, were

is squadron of

remely resistant

seman's armour

ry training for

tly charge the

ot easy at all,

horsemen did

well-equipped

does seem not

Parthi listed in

from Parthia,

t serving in the

e talking about

e command of

hypothesis can

who fled from

hr lis brother,

is used by the

itical legitimacy

evidence, he is

t accompanied

part in Julian's

; of the Romanis father - was

appointed proconsul Asiae in 379; under the reign of Theodosius I he may

have become comes rei militarist. Doubdess, the men having followed

Hormizd from his country must have been enrolled into Roman army as

an elite unit, for the reasons told above. Persian cavalry was appreciated

by Roman generals and its introduction into the Roman array would have

been important in case of a clash on an open and flat ground. The tactical

and strategic principles that distinguished the military Persian mentality

were similar to the Romans' ones. In his Strategicon (end of sixth or

beginning of seventh century) Maurice writes: «for the most part they

prefer to achieve their results by planning and generalship; they stress an

orderly approach rather than a brave and impulsive one» (transl. by

Dennis) (33). This way of waging war could surely have been approved by

Roman commanders. It is also meaningful that the Sasanian culture, like

the Roman's one, developed a strategic thought on war which is at the

foundation of its literary production of military manuals'34'.

Because of a phenomenon well known in the whole ancient world,

the more a conflict between two political powers was rising in its vehe-

mence, the more the betrayals and flights from one side to another

were increasing. To pass to the enemy's camp may have depended on

many reasons: first of all political dissatisfaction, as the case of Hormizd;

then, economical convenience, as in the case of mercenary troops; phys-

ical survival, for prisoners of war. It is not surprising, therefore, if start-

ing from the second half of the fourth century - that is, after some of

one hundred years of war between the Romans and the Sasanians - we

find a major presence of Iranians in the Roman army. Owing to their

peculiar onomatology, we can consider in such a way the following

individuals. Between 374 and 377 Ammianus mentions a Barzimeres

scutariorum tribunus, who have been sent by the emperor Valens to

capture the Armenian king Papak (35). Grazianus in 378 appointed at the

rank of magister militum Sapores, sending him to re-establish in their sees

the catholic bishops of Syria (36); he was also known by Libanius. In

383/384 we find in office in Britannia, Gaul or Spain a comes called

Narses (37), although he might have been also of Armenian origins. Between

408 and 410 is quoted in our sources the personality of Varanes <38), who,

, pp. 287-292. See

3. 104-105.

(32) Plre I, pp. 443-44, s.v. Hormisdas 3.

(33) Maur. Strut. XI 1, 6-8 ed. Dennis (Wien 1981, Cfhb, 17).

(34) On the Sasanian tradition of military manuals see Christiansen 1944, p. 217.

<35 > See Plre I, p. 148.

<36 » Plre I, p. 803.

<37) Plre I, pp. 616-17, s.v. Narses 3.

(38) Plre II, pp. 1149-50, s.v. Varanes 1.

— 252

T

according to Libanius, was son of a famous person, maybe one of the

Persians come into Roman service with Hormizd. In 408 he was ap-

pointed magister peditum in the West; in the next year he possibly be-

came magister militum praesentalis in Constantinople, reaching in 410the high dignity of consul in the pars Orientis. In the same 409 we find

as magister militum in Constantinople another Iranian, Arsacius (39). To-

wards the middle of the fifth century in Egypt is mentioned Chosroesin the rank of comes (et dux Thebaidis)m . Another comes who possibly

had Iranian origins is Artacius (41), cited in the Vita Auxentii in the peri-

od 450/457. During the reign of Leo I (457-474) the Leontoclibanarii

(Aea)VToxA.i|3avdQioi), a cavalry unit, was created (42), that owing to its

explicit military specialization, must have surely included some people of

Persian origins. Also in the civil administration we can observe an in-

creased presence of Iranians starting from the second half of the fourth

century. For example, Arsacius, keeper of the imperial lions around the

mid of the fourth century (43); Artabazaces praeses Lybiae superioris in

395/397 (44); Artabas, who has been supposed to be cubicularius at the

court of Theodosius II (45); Artaxes, another cubicularius between 442 and

451 (46); Hormisdas praefectus praetorio per Illyricum in 408 and then prae-

fectus praetorio Orientis in 451 (47).

One new unit which must have been composed of Persian soldiers

was created under Justinian's reign: the numerus Persoiustiniani, quoted'in a late sixth century Italian inscription coming from the church of

S. Eufemia in Grado (48). We do not know the precise background in

which it was recruited; it is highly probable, however, that this unit wasformed by using some of the Persians contingents which surrendered to

the Byzantines during the wars fighting between 530-531 or 540-561. Per-

haps, this circumstance can be identified with the capture of the castle

of Sisauranon by Belisarius in 541, after which Procopius relates that its

garrison was sent by Justinian to the West for being engaged against the

Gothsm . If this hypothesis is correct, the equites Persoiustiniani were

<39) Plre II, p. 152, s.v. Arsacius 3.

(40) Plre II, p. 293.(41) Plre II, p. 154.

(42) See Grosse 1920, p. 279 and Diethart-Dintsis 1984.(43) Plre I, p. 110, s.v. Arsacius 1.

(44) Plre I, p. 154.

(45) Plre II, p. 154.(46) Plre II, p. 154.(47) Plre II, p. 571.(48) See Cosentino II, p. 159, s.v. Iohannes114

.

(49) Proc. Bell. Goth. Ill 3, 11.

created in 541like Artabazes

the Italian warturn Persoiustin

unit continued

war. By this tir

a local recruitn

femia's epigrapl

Another mil

is the one of t

coming from Rrecruitment to t

territory eastwai

political influen

was incorporate

the rule of a i

inhabitants were

deep process of

relationships ke<

fluence is evidei

menians of a

throughout the

army. Therefore,

be too much di

cum the above

shouted him by

near Faenza in

before the Tagin

in duel. These

clash "man again

dwells upon in

plicidy said by 1

(50> See COSENTIN'(51) See Tjader I

Parsoarminiorum whonatium six onciae of t

(52) See Yuzbashu(53) Armenia havii

Arsacid dinasty.

(54) On Anzalas s<

(55) Christiansen

253 —

be one of the

8 he was ap-

e possibly be-

lching in 410

e 409 we find

rsacius <39). To-

>ned Chosroes

who possibly

Hi in the peri-

.eontoclibanarii

owing to its

ame people of

jbserve an in-

of the fourth

ns around the

? superioris in

zularius at the

ween 442 and

and then prae-

ersian soldiers

Hniani, quoted

the church of

aackground in

1 this unit was

surrendered to

• 540-561. Per-

; of the castle

relates that its

;ed against the

''ustiniani were

created in 541. Some of the Persians formerly serving in Sisauranon,

like Artabazes or Bleschames, are expressly mentioned by Procopius in

the Italian war theatre <50). The inscription mentioning the numerus equi-

tum Persoiustiniani, which is dated around 579, demonstrates that the

unit continued to be quartered in Italy still after the end of the Gothic

war. By this time, however, its ranks must have been enlanged through

a local recruitment, since the soldier who is remembered in the S. Eu-

femia's epigraph bears the Latin name of Iohannes.

Another military company of Justinianic time related to our subject

is the one of the numerus felicum Persoarmeniorum, cited in a papyrus

coming from Ravenna dating around 591 <51). The name in itself links its

recruitment to the area of the so-called Persoarmenia, that is roughly the

territory eastwards of the Upper Euphrates falling down under Sasanian

political influence after the Roman-Persian treaty of 390. This region

was incorporated into the Sasanian kingdom after 428 and submitted to

the rule of a marzpan appointed by the Persian shah <52). Even if its

inhabitants were not Persians, since the ancient times they underwent a

deep process of linguistic and cultural Iranization due to the very close

relationships keeping up between Parthia and Armenia <53). Such an in-

fluence is evident in the military field by the existence among the Ar-

menians of a strong tradition of an armoured cavalry force, which

throughout the Late Antiquity served both the Roman and the Persian

army. Therefore, the way in which the Persoarmenias fought should not

be too much different from that of the Persians. In the helium Gothi-

cum the above mentioned Artabazes, for instance, accepts the challenge

shouted him by the Goth Walaris when the two armies were fronting

near Faenza in 542. The Armenian Anzalas (54) made the same exploit

before the Taginae battle (552, July), when he killed the Goth Kokkas

in duel. These episodes reflected the Persian attitude for the physical

clash "man against man" ("mard u mard") (55) on which Procopius often

dwells upon in his historical work. Some of the Persoarmenias are ex-

plicidy said by him to have deserted the Sasanians for the Byzantines,

<50) See Cosentino I, pp. 180-81 (Artabazes); p. 238 (Bleschames).

(51) See TjAder II, pap. 37; this document is concerning Tzittas miles numeri felicum

Parsoarminiorum who allows his wife Rusticiana to sell to Iohannes adorator felicum Raven-

natium six onciae of the fundus Genicianus.

(52) See Yuzbashian 1996, p. 153.

(53) Armenia having been ruled from 63 AD to about 390 by a cadet branch of the

Arsacid dinasty.

(54) On Anzalas see Cosentino I, p. 169.

(35) Christiansen 1944, p. 216.

Jl

254 —

as the brothers Aratios, Isaakes and Narses, who maybe stemmed from

the noble family of the Kamsarakan <56). Many of the deserters reached

the high rank of magister militum. At the beginning of the seventh cen-

tury a certain vir gloriosus Tzittanus mentioned in a Ravenna's papyrus

is qualified as maior of the former exarch Iohannes <57). It is worth not-

ing another phenomenon related to us by the same Procopius: the high

presence of Iranians, Persarmenians, Armenians, Caucasians, Massagetae

or Huns among the soldiers forming the personal retinue of important

generals like Belisarius or Narses. This fact can only partially depend on

the shifting from the West to the East, during the fifth-sixth century, of

the most favourite recruiting areas of the empire. I think that the primary

explanation lies in the peculiar military skills of the "oriental" recruits.

In Procopius the soldiers serving as bodyguards of generals are called

Soou^opoi or vjtaojTtoTai, two non-technical terms, which have not been

fully explained so far. Usually, they are thought to be the equivalent

of the Latin buccellarii. Doubdess, they pointed out figures of fighters

characterized by a high military preparation and by peculiar relationships

with their leaders. On the whole, they can be surely considered as

elite troops. For this reason, it is a bit astonishing that Germans were

not much mentioned among them. This circumstance has been rightly

explained by stressing the importance of archery in the sixth century <58).

Iranians, Pesarmenians, Armenians, Turks, Caucasians, were skilful riders,

who were able to use on horse both the spears and the bow. By the

contrast, according to Procopius, the Ostrogothic cavalrymen have not

experience in fighting with bows, and they only employ spear and sword <59).

Maurice's Strategicon confirms the ability of Persians horsemen in using

bows, although he remarks that even if they were careful shooters, their

weapons' shot was not particularly powerful <60). For Maurice the |av0d

eOvti the "blond peoples", that is the Germans, liked better fighting on

foot than on horse (61>.

The fall of the Sasanian empire under the Arab power unfortunately

collides with a drastic decrease of the available written evidence on Byz-

antine side. This lacking of documentation prevents us from verifying

(56) On them see Cosentino I, p. 172 (Aratios); Cosentino II, pp. 226-27 (Isaakes),

pp. 417-18 (Narses2 ).m See Cosentino 1990, p. 289 (Tzittas2).

(58) BrvAR 1972, p. 286.(59) Bivar 1972, p. 286.(60) Maur. Strut. XI 1, 15-17.

(61) Maur. Stmt. XI 3, 11-12.

the extent to win the Byzantin<

ninth century nment in the imor the Khurran

individuals bear

sources of midpowerful oaxeW

who is mentior

century. But it

origins, since th

period as a syn

In any case

names are docu

euro lOTdxcov an<

dignity, which is

tion of dux; th

Greek translatic

of the Iranian <

Persarmenians.

of middle-Byzai

the subject of a

Saborios (67)(2<xf

667/668 unsucc

been Persoarme

tells us that amarmy led by the

is the Latin for

bard king Grim

in a Greek seal

ning of the eigl

Under the /

narrates a man

(62'

(63

(64:

(65

(66:

(67

(68;

(69:

On Stephan

PmbZ, n. 44

Plre III, p.

PmbZ, n. 64

Dedeyan 19

PmbZ, n. 64

Paul. Diac.

PmbZ, n. 10

255 —

stemmed from

erters reached

e seventh cen-

;nna's papyrus

is worth not-

>pius: the high

is, Massagetae

: of important

illy depend on

rth century, of

iat the primary

aital" recruits,

rals are called

have not been

the equivalent

res of fighters

ir relationships

considered as

Germans were

s been rightly

xth century (58).

: skilful riders,

: bow. By the

men have not

: and sword 159',

emen in using

shooters, their

ice the |av6d

:er fighting on

• unfortunately

dence on Byz-

from verifying

226-27 (Isaakes),

the extent to which the Iranian recruitment continued to play some role

in the Byzantine army. One source of recruiting from the seventh to the

ninth century must have been represented, as we will see, by the settle-

ment in the imperial territory of eastern populations, like the Mardaites

or the Khurramites, which probably spoke an Iranian idiom. Sometimes

individuals bearing the nickname of "the Persian" (6 neoaris) appear in

sources of middle Byzantine period, as for instance Stephanos'621,the

powerful aaKeXkaQioc, of Justinian II or the onaQaQouaybibaxoc, Leon (63),

who is mentioned on a seal dating back to the eight or to the ninth

century. But it is hard to maintain that they were surely of Iranian

origins, since the term "Persian" is often used in Byzantine texts of this

period as a synonymous with "Arab".

In any case, in the seventh century some people bearing Iranian

names are documented. Two seals hand down the memory of Chosroes (64)

goto imdtcov and of Sabur. (Sapotio) (65). The former bears a middle rank

dignity, which is often associated in other sources with the military func-

tion of dux; the latter bears not tide, but undoubtedly his name is a

Greek translation of the Persian "Sabuhr". Of course, we are not sure

of the Iranian origins of either of them, because they could have been

Persarmenians. The increasing role played by the Armenians in the army

of middle-Byzantine period is, indeed, very well known, and has been

the subject of a long article by Gerard Dedeyan some years ago (66). Also

Saborios (67) (2a(36oiog < Sabuhr") the oxQaxt]ybq tu>v 'Aquevkxxcdv who in

667/668 unsuccessfully tried to usurp Constans IPs throne, might have

been Persoarmenian, at least judging by his function. Paul the Diacon

tells us that among the optimates forming the staff officer of the Italian

army led by the same Constans II there was another Sabuhr - Saburrus

is the Latin form - who was defeated by Romualdus son of the Lom-

bard king Grimoaldus (68). A certain Chosroes <69) Jtatpbaog is mentioned

in a Greek seal dating between the end of the seventh and the begin-

ning of the eighth century.

Under the AM 6224 (= 731/732) the Chronographia by Theophanes

narrates a maritime expedition led against the Italian coasts by the

(62) On Stephanos see PmbZ, n. 6931.

<63 > PmbZ, n. 4401.(64

> Plre III, p. 308.

<65) PmbZ, n. 6477.

<66> DfiDEYAN 1987.

<67 » PmbZ, n. 6476.

(68) Paul. Diac. Hist. Lang. V, 10; see also PmbZ, n. 6478.

m PmbZ, n. 1075.

256

otQaxTiYog xtov Kv|3v0ai<yxcov (7O). The purpose for which Leo III gave

orders for doing it is not clear; Ottorino Bertolini supposed the Byzan-

tine navy to be directed against Ravenna (71). Anyhow, the expedition

failed because the Byzantine fleet was destroyed by a storm. Its leader

was called Manes (M<xvt]s < Mani). It is tempting to suppose that hemay have been one of the Mardai'tes settled down in the empire byJustinian II in 686. These Mardai'tes are something of mysterious for

scholars; since the middle of the seventh century groups of them plun-

dered and robbed both Arab Syria and Byzantine Cilicia coming fromtheir strongholds on Mount Amanus (72) (between Syria and Cilicia). In

the course of the time, after some of them migrated southwards to

Mount Lebanon, they became more and more dangerous for the Ca-

liphate. Therefore, during the treaty established in 686 between Justini-

an II and Abd al-Malik, the emperor agreed to withdraw somewhat as

20.000 Mardai'tes from the caliphate and to resettle them along the

Anatolian coast near the modern Antalya (73). Here they constituted the

backbone of the future theme of the Cybirraeots serving in it as oars-

men. I am not competent to deal with the problem of the Mardai'tes'

identity; I limit myself to stress that among the hypotheses having beendone on this topic, there is also that of a Kurdish origin <74)

. Another

Byzantine general bearing the name Manes is the 0x001x^765 xcov

BoweaAccqlcov holding his office in 766 (75). Unfortunately the source quot-

ing him, still again Theophanes, does not give any information on the

possible derivation of his name. Very probably he came from East Ana-

tolia, because Theophanes describes him as an intimate friend of the

emperor Constantine V whose family was coming from Germanikeia(modern Marda§). Other individual cited in Byzantine source having an

Iranian name are Artaser (76)('Aoxaario) and Sahperosan (77) (Saxxeooodv):

the first is mentioned on a seal with the rank of JtoooxoajTaedoioc;; the

second on a seal without any tide.

Several sources of middle Byzantine period tell about a corps of

soldiers called "the Persians" (01 IleQom). Fortunately, this time we are

(70) Theoph. Chronogr., p. 410 ed. De Boor.(71) See Bertolini 1967, pp. 15-49.(72) Treadgold 1997, p. 327.(73) Treadgold 1997, p. 332.(74) See the entries in El and in the Odb II, p. 1297 (by P. A. Hollingsworth).(75) Theoph. Chron., p. 440, 25-28; see also PmbZ, n. 4691.<76) PmbZ, n. 645.(77) PmbZ, n. 6483; maybe the same person quoted in another eighth century seal, see

PmbZ, n. 6506 (Saperozan).

(

r

able to say

contingent

Byzantines al

Caliph Al-Mthe Zagros hreceived with

be converted

Christian nan

Theophilus (79)

cavalry (soi. Tl

however, pre

(Pontos), in

majority havi

then to Sino

but in 839 tl

their leader,

empire in gra

It is time

from the thirc

to the structi

investigation

especially in

armoured cav*

than other pe

late antique B

the end of th

more by Irania

Even more im

for categorizin

The increasing

was performed

a uniform pre

connected to

come out as in

going from the

,78) Treadgolu(79) PmbZ, n. 8

(80) See Tkeadc(81) Treadgold

T

— 257

Leo III gave

2d the Byzan-

tie expedition

rm. Its leader

Dpose that he

be empire by

nysterious for

af them plun-

coming from

id Cilicia). In

:outhwards to

3 for the Ca-

:tween Justini-

somewhat as

sm along the

onstituted the

in it as oars-

be Mardaites'

s having been

in(74)

. Another

CQarriyoc; twv

e source quot-

nation on the

om East Ana-

friend of the

Germanikeia

rce having an

(Saxteooodv):

fjtaSdoiog; the

at a corps of

s time we are

gsworth).

century seal, see

able to say something more on this expression. It refers to a huge

contingent of Khurramites (about 14.000 men) who fled to the

Byzantines about 834, in the occasion of the attack launched by the

Caliph Al-Mutasim against the members of this Iranic sect settled in

the Zagros Mountains (78). The refugees, led by their leader Nasr, were

received with open arms by the emperor Theophilus after accepting to

be converted to the Christian faith. Their chief Nasr received the new

Christian name of Theophobus and married one of the wife's sisters of

Theophilus (79); his men were enrolled in a new elite corps, a tagma of

cavalry (80). The faithfulness showed by them to their new sovereign,

however, proved to be very tepid during the battle of Dazimon

(Pontos), in 838, when only few of them stayed with the emperor, the

majority having fled from the battlefield. They took shelter to Amaseia,

then to Sinope, where they proclaimed emperor Theophobus - Nasr,

but in 839 they came to terms with the emperor. After the death of

their leader, the Khurrammites were spread among the themes of the

empire in groups of two thousand for each district(81)

.

It is time to come to some conclusions. The Iranian recruitment

from the third to the ninth century made a not negligible contribution

to the structure of the Roman-Byzantine army, which deserves more

investigation by the scholars. It was favoured by the imperial power

especially in those fields of high technical military specialization, as the

armoured cavalry and the archery, where the Iranians were more expert

than other peoples. The idea of a very strong "Germanization" of the

late antique Roman army has to be reconsidered, because starting by

the end of the fourth century the elite troops seem to be composed

more by Iranians, Armenians, Caucasians, Arabs, Turks than by Germans.

Even more inadequate it turns out to be the concept of "barbarization"

for categorizing the transformations undergone in the late Roman army.

The increasing penetration of non-Romans in the military structures

was performed throughout a too long diachrony for being considered as

a uniform process. Many aspects of this barbarization are so closely

connected to the socio-economical transformations of Late Antiquity to

come out as impossible to be considered in their self. In the long period

going from the third to the seventh century the feeling of self-identity

(78) Treadgold 1988, p. 282.

(79) PmbZ, n. 8237.

(80) See Treadgold 1988, pp. 282-283 and Haldon 1984, pp. 251-252.

(81) Treadgold 1988, pp. 301, 314.

258

changed and the opposition romanitas I barbaritas was characterized

by different connotations. Of course, the interaction of the "barbarians"

with Roman society and their integration into it was not without

problems. I have not consciously dealt with this topic, because it would

have deserved another paper.

Military Byzantine culture was a quite refined one but in no military

treatises, to my knowledge, there is any express advice of avoiding non-

Greek recruitment. Late antique history had made the generals accustomed

to deal with foreign peoples in their armies. In the taktika there are

rules for dealing with the renegades; rules on how to array foreign

contingents in the batdefield, but no express prohibitions on their use.

The equilibrium between an integration pushed on by the material

need of men and a repulsion based on the traditional mentality must

have been not easy. Obviously, as long as the Romania was working out

the feeling of its cultural self-identity, the ways in which its intellectuals

looked at the "other" inclined to prejudice. Foreign populations were

judged then not for how they were or for what kind of social functionality

they exerted for the empire, but for what they represented in the

birth of a Byzantine identity. A paradigmatic case is given to us by

what happened to the Khurammites. Their flight from the battlefield

of Dazimon opened the way to the Muslim army for sacking Ancyra.

When the walls of the city were rebuilt, in 859, an inscription put on

them by the ajra8aQoxav6i6aToc; Basil for commemorating the event

seems to bring back the reader at the time of Sharbaraz's campaigns.

Here is the text: «since a long time destroyed by sorrow and brought

to your knees by the bloody hands of the Persians (i.e. the Muslims),

wake up now you (i.e. Ancyra), being revived from evils and get rid

of any doleful ugliness» (82). This is a splendid example for studying

Byzantine self-identity and how they read their past; but we would like

to know also what was the fate of the some thousands of Khurrammites

scattered by Theophilus among the themes for the defence of the

empire.

(82) This inscription has been published by Gregoire 1927-1928, p. 439, footnote n. 2.

Bertolini 1967

Bivak 1972

Brown

Carile 1986

Carrie 1995

Christiansen 1944

Cosentino

Cosentino 1990

Cracco Ruggini 19

Dedeyan 1987

Diethart - Dintsis

Eadie

Ei

Form 1953

s characterized

tie "barbarians"

is not without

ecause it would

t in no military

f avoiding non-

:rals accustomed

ktika there are

d array foreign

is on their use.

>y the material

mentality must

ras working out

its intellectuals

apulations were

dal functionality

esented in the

given to us by

the battlefield

sacking Ancyra.

cription put on

iting the event

az's campaigns,

w and brought

. the Muslims),

ils and get rid

le for studying

we would like

f Khurrammites

defence of the

439, footnote n. 2.

Bertolini 1967

Bivar 1972

Brown

Carile 1986

Carrie 1995

Christiansen 1944

Cosentino

Cosentino 1990

Cracco Ruggini 1984

Dedeyan 1987

Diethart - Dintsis 1984

Eadie

Ei

Forni 1953

— 259 —

Bibliography

O. Bertolini, Quale fu il vero obbiettivo assegnato in

Italia da Leone III Isaurico all'armata di Manes stratego

dei Cibirreoti?, «Byzantinische Forschungen» 2 (1967),

pp. 15-49.

A. D. H. Bwar, Cavalry Equipment and Tactics on the

Euphrates River, «Dumbarton Oaks Papers» 26 (1972),

pp. 273-108.

P. Brown, II filosofo e il monaco: due scelte tardoan-

tiche, in Storia di Roma, III, L'etd tardoantica, 1, Crist

e trasformazioni, Torino 1992, pp. 877-894.

A. Carile, L'iconoclasmo tra Bisanzio e I'ltalia, in Cul-

to delle immagini e crisi iconoclasta, Palermo 1986,

pp. 13-54.

J. M. Carrie, L'Etat a la recherche de nouveaux modes

de financement des armies (Rome et Byzance, IVe-VIIIe

siecles), in The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East,

III, States, Resources and Armies, edited by A. Cam-

eron, Princeton 1995, pp. 27-60.

A. Christiansen, LTran sous les Sassanides, deuxieme

edition revue et augmentee, Copenhague 1944.

S. Cosentino, Prosopografia dell'Italia hizantina (493-

804), I, A-F, Bologna 1996; II, G-O, Bologna 2000.

S. Cosentino, Indagine prosopografica sull'Italia hizantina

(493-804). Fonti documentarie, epigrafiche, sigillografiche,

Bologna 1990.

L. Cracco Ruggini, I harhari in Italia nei secoli

dell'impero, in Magistra Barharitas. I harbari in Italia,

Milano 1984, pp. 3-51.

G. Dedeyan, Les Armeniens soldats de Byzance (TVe-

XT siecles), «Bazmavep. Revue d'fitudes Armeniennes»

145 (1987), pp. 162-192.

J. M. Diethart - P. Dintsis, Die Leontoklibanarier in

BYZANTIOS. Festschrift fur Hebert Hunger, Wien

1984, pp. 67-84.

J. W. Eadie, The Development of Roman Mailed Cav-

alry, «The Journal of Roman Studies* 57 (1967),

pp. 161-173.

The Encyclopaedia of Islam, new ed. Leiden 1986.

G. Forni, II reclutamento delle legioni da Augusto a

Diocleziano, Milano-Roma 1953.

Forni 1992

Gabba 1974

Garsoian 1992

Gnoli 2000

Gregoire 1927-1928

Grosse 1920

Haldon 1984

Heather 1998

Isaac 1992

Jones 1964

Mann 1983

Not. dign.

Odb

Plre

260

G. Forni, Estrazione etnica e sociale dei soldati delle

legioni net primi tre secoli dell'impero, in Id., Esercito

e marina di Roma antica. Raccolta di contributi (al-

ready published in Aufstieg und Niedergang der ro-

mischen Welt II/4), Stuttgart 1992, pp. 1-141.

E. Gabba, Sulle influenze reciproche degli ordinamenti

militari dei Parti e dei Romani, in Id., Per la Storia

dell'esercito romano in eta imperiale, Bologna 1974

(already printed in La Persia e il mondo greco-romano,

Roma 1966, pp. 51-73).

N. Garsoian, Hart iranien comme temoin de I'armement

armenien sous les Arsacides, in Atti del Quinto Simposio

Internationale di Arte Armena, a c. di B.L. Zekiyan,

Venezia 1992, pp. 385-395 (re-published in Ead, Church

and Culture in Early Medieval Armenia, Aldershot-

Brookfield 1999, X).

T. Gnoli, Roma, Edessa e Palmira nel III sec. d.C.

Problemi istituzionali, Pisa-Roma 2000.

B. Gregoire, Inscriptions historiques byzantines, «Byz-

antion» 4 (1927-1928).

R. Grosse, Romische Militdrgeschichte von Gallienus

bis zum Beginn der byzantinischen Themenverfassung,

Berlin 1920.

J. F. Haldon, Byzantine Pretorians. An Administrative,

Institutional and Social Survey of the Opsikion andTagmata, c. 580-900, Bonn 1984.

P.J. Heather, Disappearing and reappearing tribes, in

Strategies of Distinction. The Construction of Ethnic

Communities, 300-800, ed. by W. Pohl with H. Reim-

itz, Leiden-Boston-K6ln 1998, pp. 95-111.

B. Isaac, The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in

the East, revised edition, Oxford 1992.

A. H. M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire, 284-602. ASocial, Economical and Administrative Survey, I-III,

Oxford 1964.

J. C. Mann, Legionary Recruitment and Veteran Settle-

ment during the Principate, edited for publication byM. M. Roxan, London 1983.

Notitia dignitatum, accedunt Notitia urbis Constantino-

politanae et Latercula provinciarum, edidit O. Seek,

Frankfurt am Main 19622.

The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, 3 vols., NewYork-Oxford 1991.

The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire I (A.D.

284-385), by A.H.M. Jones, R Martindale, J. Morris,

PmbZ

Pohl 2000

Re

Szidat 1995

TjADER

Treadgold 1988

Treadgold 1997

Whitby 2000

Widengren 1976

Yuzbashian 1996

261 —

e dei soldati delle

V, in Id., Esercito

di contributi (al-

Jiedergang der ro-

pp. 1-141.

degli ordinamenti

Id., Per la Storia

le, Bologna 1974

mdo greco-romano,

toin de I'armement

?/ Quinto Simposio

di B.L. Zekiyan,

ed in Ead., Church

menia, Aldershot-

nel III sec. d.C.

00.

byzantines, «Byz-

hte von Gallienus

Themenverfassung,

\n Administrative,

the Opsikion and

Vpearing tribes, in

'ruction of Ethnic

>hl with H. Reim-

'5-111.

? Roman Army in

>92.

mpire, 284-602. Aive Survey, I-III,

'.nd Veteran Settle-

on publication by

urbis Constantino-

,edidit O. Seek,

m, 3 vols., New

in Empire I (A.D.

tindale, J. Morris,

PmbZ

Pohl 2000

Re

Szidat 1995

TjADER

Treadgold 1988

Treadgold 1997

Whitby 2000

WlDENGREN 1976

Yuzbashian 1996

Cambridge 1971; II (A.D. 385-527), by R. Martindale,

Cambridge 1980; III/ A-B (A.D. 527-641), by R.

Martindale, Cambridge 1992.

Prosopographie der mittel-byzantinische Zeit, nach

Vorarbeiten F. Winkelmanns erstellt von R.-J. Lilie,

C. Ludwig, T. Pratsch, I. Rochow, B. Zielke u. a., I-

VI, Berlin-New York 1999-2002.

W. Pohl, Die Germanen, Miinchen 2000 (Enzyk-

lopadie Deutscher Geschichte, 57).

Paulys Real-Enzyclopddie der classischen Altertumwis-

senschaft, neue Bearbeitung hrsg. von G. Wissowa,

Stuttgart 1894.

J. Szidat, Le forme d'insediamento dei barbari in Ital-

ia tra V e VI secolo: sviluppi e conseguenze sociali e

politiche, in Teoderico e i Goti tra Oriente e Occi-

dente, a c. di A. Carile, Ravenna 1995, pp. 67-78.

J.O. Tjader, Die nichtliterarischen lateinischen Papyri

Italiens aus der Zeit 445-700, I (Papp. 1-28), II, (Papp.

29-59), Stockholm 1982.

W. Treadgold, The Byzantine Revival 780-842, Stan-

ford 1988.

W. Treadgold, A History of the Byzantine State and

Society, Stanford 1997.

M. Whitby, The Army, c. 420-602, in The Cambridge

Ancient History, vol. XIV, Late Antiquity: Empire and

Successors, A. 425-600, ed. by A. Cameron, B. Ward-

Perkins, M. Whitby, Cambridge 2000, pp. 288-314.

G. WlDENGREN, Iran, der grofie Gegner Roms: Konigs-

gewalt, Feudalismus, Militdrwesen in Aufstieg und Nie-

dergang der romischen Welt, 11/9,1, hrsg. von H. Tem-

porini, Berlin-New York 1976, pp. 219-306.

K. Yuzbashian, Le Caucase et les Sassanides in II Cau-

caso: cerniera fra culture dal Mediterraneo alia Persia

(secoli IV-XI), I, Spoleto 1996, pp. 143-164.