User:Hollowww/sandbox1: Difference between revisions – Wikipedia

Line 3: Line 3:

=== Historical ambition of the Sasanians ===

=== Historical ambition of the Sasanians ===

{{See also|Greater Iran}}

{{See also|Greater Iran}}

[[File:Naqsh i Rustam. Investiture d’Ardashir 1.jpg|thumb|{{center|[[Ardashir I]] is crowned ruler by the God [[Ahura Mazdā]] in a relief at [[Naqsh-i-Rustam]].}}]]

In [[229]], Sasanian troops led by [[Ardashir I]] invaded the Roman provinces of [[Roman Syria|Syria]] and [[Mesopotamia (Roman province)|Mesopotamia]].{{sfnp|Southern|2001|p=61}} Ancient historians, such as Greeks beginning with [[Ammianus Marcellinus]] and Muslims following [[al-Tabari]], link Persian aggression westward to aspirations of restoring [[Achaemenid]] greatness.{{sfnp|Nöldeke|1973|p=3}}{{sfnp|Shahbazi|2001|p=62}} This theory remained dominant until the late nineteenth century, when it was first challenged by the German orientalist [[Theodor Nöldeke]], who argued that by the third century, Iran retained no authentic memories of the era of [[Alexander the Great]], and that the traditions preserved in Muslim sources reflected the ”[[Alexander Romance]]”, known in the late Sasanian period.{{sfnp|Nöldeke|1973|p=3}} This new theory gained widespread recognition only after the publication in 1971 of [[Ehsan Yarshater]]’s article “Were the Sasanians Heirs to the Achaemenids?”.{{sfnp|Daryaee|2005|p=387}}

In [[229]], Sasanian troops led by [[Ardashir I]] invaded the Roman provinces of [[Roman Syria|Syria]] and [[Mesopotamia (Roman province)|Mesopotamia]].{{sfnp|Southern|2001|p=61}} Ancient historians, such as Greeks beginning with [[Ammianus Marcellinus]] and Muslims following [[al-Tabari]], link Persian aggression westward to aspirations of restoring [[Achaemenid]] greatness.{{sfnp|Nöldeke|1973|p=3}}{{sfnp|Shahbazi|2001|p=62}} This theory remained dominant until the late nineteenth century, when it was first challenged by the German orientalist [[Theodor Nöldeke]], who argued that by the third century, Iran retained no authentic memories of the era of [[Alexander the Great]], and that the traditions preserved in Muslim sources reflected the ”[[Alexander Romance]]”, known in the late Sasanian period.{{sfnp|Nöldeke|1973|p=3}} This new theory gained widespread recognition only after the publication in 1971 of [[Ehsan Yarshater]]’s article “Were the Sasanians Heirs to the Achaemenids?”.{{sfnp|Daryaee|2005|p=387}}

Line 95: Line 96:

It is known that the Sasanian army employed Indian [[War elephant|elephant]]s to transport [[archer]]s and [[javelin thrower]]s, as well as for siege warfare and psychological intimidation. The ”Historia Augusta” provides detailed figures of 700 elephants, 120,000 [[cataphract]]s and 1,800 [[scythed chariot]]s on the Sasanian side.{{sfnp|Dodgeon|Lieu|2002|p=23}} Scholars question the reliability of this information, attributing it to the chronicle’s authors’ desire to emphasize the parallel between Alexander Severus and [[Alexander the Great|his famous namesake]], who defeated the Persians and their elephants [[Battle of Gaugamela|at Gaugamela]].{{sfnp|Roth|1994|p=351}}{{sfnp|Charles|1998|p=1}}{{sfnp|Wiesehöfer|1986|pp=371–376}} According to Ancient historian [[Herodian]], the strength of the Sasanian troops was roughly equal to the Roman one,{{sfnp|Dodgeon|Lieu|2002|p=15}} thus around 80,000 men.

It is known that the Sasanian army employed Indian [[War elephant|elephant]]s to transport [[archer]]s and [[javelin thrower]]s, as well as for siege warfare and psychological intimidation. The ”Historia Augusta” provides detailed figures of 700 elephants, 120,000 [[cataphract]]s and 1,800 [[scythed chariot]]s on the Sasanian side.{{sfnp|Dodgeon|Lieu|2002|p=23}} Scholars question the reliability of this information, attributing it to the chronicle’s authors’ desire to emphasize the parallel between Alexander Severus and [[Alexander the Great|his famous namesake]], who defeated the Persians and their elephants [[Battle of Gaugamela|at Gaugamela]].{{sfnp|Roth|1994|p=351}}{{sfnp|Charles|1998|p=1}}{{sfnp|Wiesehöfer|1986|pp=371–376}} According to Ancient historian [[Herodian]], the strength of the Sasanian troops was roughly equal to the Roman one,{{sfnp|Dodgeon|Lieu|2002|p=15}} thus around 80,000 men.

⚫

[[File:Knight-Iran.JPG|left|thumb|{{center|A [[bas relief]] located in [[Taq-e Bostan]] depicting a heavily armed horseman from the Sassanid era.}}]]

[[File:Knight-Iran.JPG|left|thumb|{{center|A [[bas relief]] located in [[Taq-e Bostan]] depicting a heavily armed horseman from the Sassanid era.}}]]

⚫

== Notes ==

== Notes ==

Prelude

Historical ambition of the Sasanians

In 229, Sasanian troops led by Ardashir I invaded the Roman provinces of Syria and Mesopotamia. Ancient historians, such as Greeks beginning with Ammianus Marcellinus and Muslims following al-Tabari, link Persian aggression westward to aspirations of restoring Achaemenid greatness. This theory remained dominant until the late nineteenth century, when it was first challenged by the German orientalist Theodor Nöldeke, who argued that by the third century, Iran retained no authentic memories of the era of Alexander the Great, and that the traditions preserved in Muslim sources reflected the Alexander Romance, known in the late Sasanian period. This new theory gained widespread recognition only after the publication in 1971 of Ehsan Yarshater‘s article “Were the Sasanians Heirs to the Achaemenids?”.

The resulting surge of scholarly interest in this topic produced significant arguments both supporting and challenging the continuation of Achaemenid tradition in the Sasanian period. Ultimately, most scholars adopted a compromise position that acknowledges both alternatives: the Sasanians understood their ancestors to be the legendary Avestan Kayanid dynasty, while simultaneously possessing knowledge of the historical Achaemenids through Hellenistic, Talmudic, and Christian traditions. An alternative view holds that the early Sasanian kings were aware of the Achaemenids, and that the reorientation toward the Kayanids occurred only in the fifth century.

In this context, it is worth noting the theory proposed by the Italian historian Gnoli, according to which the concept of “Iran” was formulated during the reign of Ardashir. Previously, the term “Ērān-vēž” had been understood in a religious sense as the cradle of humanity, whereas Ardashir gave it a political meaning that reflected the idea of reviving a national state. This perspective may well explain the territorial claims of the Sasanian state against the Roman Empire, rooted in a distinctly Zoroastrian view of geography. The Shahnameh recounts how the hero Fereydun divided his kingdom among three sons: Tur, who received the lands in the north and east; Salm, who received the west; and the youngest, Iraj, to whom his father bequeathed the central portion of the state. The treacherous brothers killed Iraj and seized his inheritance. Thus, the emergence of “Iran” could have been perceived by the Sasanians as a restoration of historical justice.

Ardashir’s campaigns

The first city to be attacked, according to Cassius Dio, was Hatra. At that time, the city, incorporated into the the Roman Empire’s domains between 198 and 217, maintained relative independence under its king Sanatruq II and controlled the Arab tribes in the region.^[a] However, the city’s defenses, whose fortifications according to archaeological evidence reached 30 meters in height and had enabled it to withstand two sieges by the army of Septimius Severus, proved impregnable to the army of the young Sasanian state. In 230 Ardashir’s forces penetrated trough Cappadocia, and unsuccessfully besieged Nisibis. Meanwhile, Hatra was garrisoned by the Legio I Parthica and the Cohors IX Maurorum.

However, the main center of resistance to Ardashir for an extended period, eleven years according to Agathangelos, or even until the death of Emperor Philip the Arab (ca. 249) according to Movses Khorenatsi, was Armenia. The chronology of Ardashir’s campaigns against Armenia is difficult to establish precisely, but his initial expeditions were likely undertaken simultaneously with his first campaign against Hatra and proved equally unsuccessful. The detailed account by Agathangelos, a fifth-century compilation that includes descriptions of raids into Asuristan and the capture of Ctesiphon, probably exaggerates the scale and significance of events in Armenia during the 220s and 230s. Nevertheless, according to Cassius Dio, Emperor Alexander Severus was unprepared for such a turn of events, and his army in that part of the empire was in unsatisfactory condition. Herodian reports that an embassy was dispatched to the shahanshah (Ardashir) bearing a message from the emperor, which proposed maintaining the existing borders and recalled the great victories of Augustus, Trajan, and Septimius Severus. Ardashir disregarded this warning and continued to ravage Mesopotamia.

Preparations

Opposing forces

Romans

Army composition

As of the death of Emperor Septimius Severus, in 211, two decades before Alexander’s campaigns, the Roman army comprised 33 legions (182,000 legionaries) and over 400 auxiliary units (roughly 250,000 auxiliaries, of whom about 75,000 served as cavalry).^[b] Under the Severan dynasty, the Roman army underwent significant development and modernization. The size of urban formations increased substantially: urban cohorts now numbered 6,000 soldiers, and the vigiles 7,000. Although Italians continued to hold leading military positions, provincials had long constituted the majority of the army.

During the reign of Septimius Severus, officer posts became more accessible to the lower social classes. Furthermore, the edict issued by Emperor Caracalla in 212, which granted Roman citizenship to all free inhabitants of the empire, proved pivotal for the composition of the Roman army. Whether the emperor was motivated by benevolence toward his subjects or by fiscal considerations, as Roman historian Cassius Dio believed, the law brought profound changes to Roman society, particularly by eliminating the distinction between legionary and auxiliary forces.

Military administration in Mesopotamia

The province of Mesopotamia, enstablished by Septimius Severus in 198 after his victory, lay east of the newly established province of Osrhoene and the remnants of the Kingdom of Edessa, extending beyond the Khabur River to the upper Tigris. Two of the three new legions were stationed in this province: the I Parthica at Singara (modern-day Sinjar, Iraq) and the III Parthica, in Rhesaina.^[c] The province was governed by a prefect of equestrian rank. Unlike the short-lived province that had existed under Trajan, the province established by Septimius Severus addressed long-term strategic challenges and provided a reliable defense for Syria. The formation of the eastern provincial system was completed when Caracalla abolished the nominally independent Kingdom of Edessa and annexed it to the province of Osrhoene in 212.

Papyri archives discovered during excavations at Dura-Europos in 1931–32 reveal that numerous Roman fortifications and settlements existed north and south of the city, as well as along the Khabur River. The city itself housed detachments from the Legio III Cyrenaica, the X Fretensis, the XVI Flavia Firma, and the IV Scythica at various times. The most extensive documentation concerns the Cohors XX Palmyrenorum. These records demonstrate that Dura-Europos served as an important center of civil administration for the entire region during the Parthian period, and that following the Roman arrival, garrison soldiers stationed in the city and dispersed throughout surrounding settlements contributed significantly to the Romanization of northern Mesopotamia.

Other garrisons are known to have been stationed in the lower Khabur valley: papyri mention Cohors III Augusta Thracum (around 227) and Cohors XII Palestinorum (in the early 230s). Epigraphic evidence also attests to the presence of vexillations from the XVI Flavia Firma at Sura, where a bridge crossed the Euphrates.

Expeditionary army

Of the hundreds of thousands of Roman soldiers in the army, the Historia Augusta reports that 30,000 of them came from six legions (pictured right). After a brief analysis of the troops available for Alexander, McHugh argues the total soldiers dispatched were 21,000. This force included cavalry provided by the King of Osrhoene, Ma’nu IX, son of Ma’nu, which was stationed in the Castra Peregrina in the capital. Alongside these were the elite Praetorians, totaling 10,000 men, six urban cohorts of 1,500 men each, and 5,000 legionaries of the Legio II Parthica at Alba. The vast majority of this reserve was taken to the East, with only a minimal garrison left to ensure order in the capital, comprised of the Praetorians.

The 21,000 soldiers then joined the remnants of the Roman army garrisoned in the east, numbering around 60,000 men, for a total force of around 81,000 soldiers.

Sasanians

Iranian society under the Sasanians was divided, possibly by Ardashir I, into four estates, the second of which (arteshtaran) comprised mounted and foot soldiers.^[d] Ardashir, who began his career as a general, possessed extensive knowledge of both ancient and contemporary military affairs. Drawing upon the Achaemenid military organization, Parthian cavalry traditions, and siege technology borrowed from the Romans, he established the foundations of an army that would serve his successors for four centuries. The backbone of the army (Persian: spāh) was the heavy cavalry, the earliest descriptions of which, found in the Res Gestae of Ammianus Marcellinus and in the novel Aethiopica, date to the mid-fourth century.

Composition and source problems

It is known that the Sasanian army employed Indian elephants to transport archers and javelin throwers, as well as for siege warfare and psychological intimidation. The Historia Augusta provides detailed figures of 700 elephants, 120,000 cataphracts and 1,800 scythed chariots on the Sasanian side. Scholars question the reliability of this information, attributing it to the chronicle’s authors’ desire to emphasize the parallel between Alexander Severus and his famous namesake, who defeated the Persians and their elephants at Gaugamela. According to Ancient historian Herodian, the strength of the Sasanian troops was roughly equal to the Roman one, thus around 80,000 men.

War

Notes

References

Bibliography