Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 January 2017
In 561/2, a few years before the death of the Emperor Justinian, Roman envoys concluded a peace treaty with the Persian Empire. A detailed account of the negotiations and terms is preserved among the surviving portions of the sixth-century history by Menander Protector. For the immediate purposes of this paper, the most important features of this treaty were that it ended more than twenty years of intermittent warfare between the two empires, that the treaty was to remain in force for fifty years, and that the Romans were required to make substantial payments of gold to the Persians at a rate of 30,000 solidi per year.
1 The most recent and convenient edition of Menander (with translation) is that of Blockley, R. C., The History of Menander the Guardsman, Liverpool 1985 Google Scholar, whose numbering of the fragments is used in this paper.
2 Frag. 6. 1. The clauses of the treaty appear at lines 314–93, and the specifications regarding the payments at lines 147–54: the Persians were to receive the first seven years’ payment, and then the next three years’, as lump sums, before annual payments commenced in the tenth year of the treaty.
3 Frag. 5. 1–2 (trans. R. C. Blockley).
4 In laudem Iustini minoris, ed. and trans. Cameron, A. M., London 1976, iii. 308–98Google Scholar.
5 Ibid. i. 258–61 (trans. A. M. Cameron).
6 Indeed, as noted by Whitby, M., The Emperor Maurice and his Historian: Theophylact Simocatta on Persian and Balkan warfare, Oxford 1988, 261 Google Scholar, Justin must in fact have paid the Persians in 568/9 the 90,000 solidi due then under the terms of the 561/2 settlement (cf.n. 2 above).
7 Highlighted ibid, where the relevant references may be found.
8 Procopius, Buildings, ed. Haury, J., Wirth, rev. G., Leipzig, 1964, ii. 1. 13 Google Scholar.
9 Whitby, M., ‘Procopius and the development of Roman defences in Upper Mesopotamia’, in Freeman, P. W. and Kennedy, D. L. (eds), The Defence of the Roman and Byzantine East, Oxford, 1986, 717–35, at p. 729Google Scholar.
10 For references and analysis of the events of 572–3, and for the history of ensuing war, see Whitby, , Maurice, 254–304. Google Scholar
11 For detailed discussion of, and commentary on, Evagrius, see Allen, P., Evagrius Scholasticus the Church Historian, Louvain 1981 Google Scholar.
12 HE g, v., ed. Bidez, J. and Parmentier, L., London 1898, 204 Google Scholar, lines 18–205, line 17.
13 For a stimulating consideration of this theme from a more general perspective, see Brock, S., ‘Christians in the Sasanian empire: a case of divided loyalties’, in Mews, S. (ed.), Religion and National Identity (Studies in Church History xviii, (1982), 1–19 Google Scholar.
14 Cf. Nestorius' own approval, in his Book of Heraclides, of Leo's Tome which foreshadowed and influenced the Chalcedonian definition: Young, F., From Nicaea to Chalcedon, London 1983, 230 Google Scholar.
1 Chadwick, H., The Early Church, Harmondsworth 1967, 192–210 Google Scholar; idem, ‘The Chalcedonian definition’, in Actes du Concile de Chalcédoine, sessions III–VI, trans. Festugiere, A.-J., Geneva 1983, 7–16 Google Scholar (repr. in H. Chadwick, Heresy and Orthodoxy in the Early Church, London 1991).
16 Labourt, J., Le Christianisme dans l' empire perse sous la dynastic sassanide (224–632), Paris 1904, 260–2Google Scholar; Harvey, S.A., ‘Nestorianism’, in Ferguson, E. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, New York-London 1990, 645–6Google Scholar.
17 See the convenient summary in Herrin, J., The Formation of Christendom, Oxford 1987, 119–25Google Scholar.
18 Novel cxxxi. 14 (545), in Schoell, R. and Kroll, W. (eds), Corpus Iuris Civilis iii (Novellae), Berlin 1895, 662–3Google Scholar(Nestorians forbidden to purchase or construct churches).
19 The evidence discussed in pp. 576–7 below confirms this assumption.
20 See, e.g. Stein, E., Studien zur Geschichte des byzantinischen Reiches, vomehmlich unter den Kaisem Justinus II. und Tiberius Constantinus, Stuttgart 1919, 43–4Google Scholar; Goubert, P., Byzance avant l' Islam, Paris 1951, i. 69 Google Scholar.
21 Allen, , Evagrius, 221 Google Scholar; cf. 224: ‘Evagrius’ hostile attitude to Justin…is in some measure understandable. Justin had after all slighted Gregory's attempts to keep him informed about the advance of the Persians.’
22 ‘DaB der Vorwurf des Euagrios in diesem Falle objektiv gerechtfertig ist, wird nicht in Frage gestellt’: Tinnefeld, F. H., Kategorien der Kaiserkritik in der byzantinischen Historiographie von Prokop bis Nicetas Choniates, Munich 1973, 46 n. 103 Google Scholar.
23 Whitby, , Maurice, 257 Google Scholar; cf. n. 10 on the same page: ‘The bishop might rather have been reporting the winter preparations of the Persian marzban, or Marcian's unsuccessful attack on Thebothon.’
24 Cameron, Averil, ‘Early Byzantine Kaiserkritik: two case histories’, Byzantine and Modem Greek Studies iii (1976), 1–17, at p. 10Google Scholar.
25 Surviving fragment in Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, ed. Miiller, C., Paris 1851, iv. 273–6Google Scholar.
26 Contra Garsoian, N., ‘Le rôle de l'hierarchie chrétienne dans les rapports diplomatiques entre Byzance et les Sassanides’, Revue des etudes armeniennes x (1973–1974), 119–38Google Scholar, at p. 133 n. 65.
27 I owe this point to Michael Whitby, who also observes that since the other major historian for this period, John of Ephesus, was a Monophysite, he was unlikely to have known about the activities of a Nestorian bishop. Garsoian (n. 26) also remarks on the absence of any reference to the incident in Theophanes Byzantinus and Menander Protector, but Theophanes is only preserved as a summary by Photius, (Bibliotheca, ed. Henry, R., Paris 1959–1977 Google Scholar, cod.64) and Menander only survives in fragmentary form.
28 Rhetor, Ps.-Zacharias, HE vii. 5 Google Scholar, ed. and trans. E. W. Brooks, CSCO Scr. Syr. iii/6 [39, 42]. 31, lines 16–17; Latin trans. 21, lines 18–19.
29 Procopius, , Wars, ed. Haury, J., rev. Wirth, G., Leipzig 1962–1963, i. 15 Google Scholar. 32; cf. Simocatta, Theophylact, History, ed. Boor, C. de, Wirth, rev. P., Stuttgart 1972, ii. 7 Google Scholar. 6–10.
30 Procopius, , Wars ii. 24. 6ffGoogle Scholar.
31 Chronicle of Seert ii. 74, trans. Scher, A. and Griveau, R., PO xiii1. 509 Google Scholar. For important evidence indicating Roman concern about the loyalties of religious communities on the Persian frontier, see Palmer, A., Monk and Mason on the Tigris: the early history of the Tur Abdin, Cambridge 1990, 49–58 Google Scholar, 113–19. To the possible objection that bishops would not have sullied their hands with such tawdry matters as military intelligence, one need only refer to the case of Isho-yahb, bishop of the frontier region of Arzanene in the 580s, who was made catholicos of the Church in Persia by Hormizd iv because ‘the king knew him and loved him, for it was he who provided the king with information concerning the movements of the Roman armies’: Chron. Seert ii. 42, PO xiii. 438.
32 Fiey, J. M., Misibe: métropole syriaque orientale et ses suffragants dès origines à nos jours, Louvain 1977, 53–4Google Scholar; Garsoïan, , ‘Le rôle de l' hiérarchie chrétienne’, 133 Google Scholar n. 65. Garsoïan does express caution about the identity of the bishop — ‘L’ éveque lui-même ne peut en outre être identifié catégoriquement. II s'agit probablement du métropolitan Paul de Nisibe' - though without providing good justification for doing so. She is, however, the only scholar I have found who has queried Evagrius' information concerning the bishop, even if for reasons which do not ultimately carry conviction (cf. n. 27).
33 For the date, see Fiey, J. M., ‘Iso'dnah et la Chronique de Seert’, Parole de I'Orient, vi–vii (1975–1976), 447–59Google Scholar, at p. 455. For its value, see Fiey, J. M., Jalons pour une histoire de Ue'glise en Iraq, Louvain 1970, 21–3Google Scholar; Decret, F., ‘Les conséquences sur le christianisme en Perse de l' affrontement des empires romaine et sassanide', Recherches Augustiniennes xiv (1979), 91–152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at pp. 97–9.
34 Chron. Seert ii. 36, trans. Scher, A., PO vii. 193 Google Scholar.
35 Arbaya, Barhadbeshabba, HE 32 Google Scholar, ed. and trans. Nau, F., PO ix. 628–30Google Scholar.
36 Chron. Seert ii. 32, PO vii. 187. For detailed discussion of this episode, see Guillaumont, A., ‘Un colloque entre orthodoxes et théologiens nestoriens de Perse sous Justinien’, Comptes rendus de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Bells-letters (1970), 201–7Google Scholar, and‘Justinien et I'église de Perse’ Dumbarton Oaks Papers xxiii–xxiv (1969–1970), 41–66. Guillaumont, however, makes no references to the episode from 572–3 in EvagriusGoogle Scholar.
37 Ibid. 51; Fiey, , Nisibe, 52. HoweverGoogle Scholar, Sako, L., Le Rôle de la hierarchic syriaque orientate dans les rapports diplomatiques entre la Perse et Byzance aux Ve-VIIe siècles, Paris 1986, 93–4Google Scholar, has recently argued that the date of Paul's trip was in fact 546–7 (I am most grateful to Sebastian Brock for drawing my attention to this reference). His argument that one of Paul's companions, Mari of Balad, must have been dead by 554 is an important one in his favour, but Paul is not thought to have become bishop of Nisibis until 551 ( Voobus, A., History of the School of Nisibis, Louvain 1965, 148 Google Scholar, 170), and a date in the 560s would make more sense of Abraham's protestations about his advanced age. In any event, a redating of the episode would not affect the conclusions of this paper in any substantial way.
38 It is, however, unlikely that Paul met Gregory himself in Constantinople in the 560s, since prior to his elevation to the patriarchate of Antioch in 570, Gregory had been a monk in Palestine and then abbot of a monastery in the Sinai: Evagrius, , HE v. 6 Google Scholar; Allen, , Evagrius, 217–18Google Scholar.
39 Chron. Seert ii. 36, PO vii.194. Fiey, (Nisibe, 54–5Google Scholar) links this with Evagrius' account to suggest that a spy had told Ezechiel of Paul's true sentiments.
40 The text is discussed by Guillaumont in the two papers cited in n. 36, and translated in ‘Justinien et l'église’, at pp. 62–6.
41 Chron. Seert ii. 93, PO xiii. 560. I owe this point, and the specific example cited, to Michael Whitby.
42 Honigmann, E., ‘Anthimus of Trebizond, patriarch of Constantinople’, in his Patristic Studies, Rome 1953, 185–93 Google Scholar, at PP. 186–7; Frend, W. H. C., The Rise of the Monophysite Movement Cambridge 1972, 270–1Google Scholar; Brock, S., ‘The orthodox-oriental orthodox conversations of 532’, Apostolos Varnavas xli (1980), 219–27Google Scholar, at p. 219.
43 On which see Allen, , Evagrius, 42, 48, 105Google Scholar.
44 Cameron, Averil, ‘The early religious policies of Justin 11’, in Baker, D. (ed.), The Orthodox Churches and the West (Studies in Church History xiii, 1976), 51–67 Google Scholar. Note also the evidence for a previously unattested colloquium in 571 presented by Halleux, A. de, ‘Trois synodes impériaux du Vie S. dans une chronique syriaque inédite’, in Fischer, R. H. (ed.), A Tribute to Arthur Vob'bus, Chicago 1977, 295–307 Google Scholar.
45 However, his rejection of the argument that by invading Persia in 572 he would be attacking a predominantly Christian population (Menander Protector, frag. 16. 1) is more likely to be indicative of his determination to go to war than of disdain for Nestorians as such.
46 Guillaumont, , ‘Justinien et l'église’, 55–60 Google Scholar. Herrin overstates the situation when she says that the council of 585 ‘condemned Justinian as a heretic’ (Formation, 124), for his name is certainly not mentioned explicitly in the text of that council's canons.
47 Protector, Menander, frag. 6 Google Scholar. i, lines 398–407.
48 Barnes, T. D., ‘Constantine and the Christians of Persia’, JRS lxxv (1985), 126–36Google Scholar; Holum, K. G., ‘Pulcheria's crusade AD 421–22 and the ideology of imperial victory’. Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies xviii (1977), 153–72Google Scholar, at pp. 162ff.
49 Labourt, , Le Christianisme dans l' empire perse, chs iv, v Google Scholar; Devos, P., ‘Les martyrs persans à travers leurs actes syriaques’, inLa Persia e il mondo greco-romano (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Quaderno lxxvi), Rome 1966, 213–25Google Scholar; Fiey, , Jalons, 85–99 Google Scholar; Brock, ‘Christians in the Sasanian empire’. However, the execution of the catholicos Babowai in 484 for having written a letter to the Emperor Zeno shows that residual suspicions survived.
50 HE vi. 20, ed. and trans. Brooks, E. W. Google Scholar, CSCO Scr. Syr. iii/3 [54, 55]. 316, lines 14–20; Latin trans. 240, lines 12–18.
51 Chron. Seert ii. 24, PO vii. 147.
52 Ibid.
53 HE vi. 20, CSCO Scr. Syr. iii/3. 316, lines 20–2; Latin trans. 240, lines 18–20.
54 Ibid.316, line 22–318, line 13; Latin trans. 240, line 21–241, line 33.
55 History of Mar Ahudemmeh, ed. and trans. Nau, F., PO iii. 31 Google Scholar, with discussion in Oates, D., Studies in the Ancient History of Northern Iraq, London 1968, 113ffGoogle Scholar.
56 For the Syriac text of the martyrdoms of Grigor and Yazdpanah, see Bedjan, P., Histoire de Mar-Jabalaha, de trois autres patriarches, d'un prêtre et deux laïques, nestoriens, Leipzig 1895, 347–94 394–415Google Scholar; for a German translation of excerpts, see Hoffmann, G., Ausziige aus syrischen Akten persischer Mdrtyrer, Leipzig 1880, 78–86 Google Scholar, 87–91. For a Latin translation of the Armenian text of the martyrdom of Yazdbozid, see AASS Nov. iv. 204–13. For the (Greek) text of the martyrdom of Shirin, see Devos, P., ‘Sainte Shirin, martyre sous Khosrau Ier Anosarvan’, ABhdv (1946), 87–131 Google Scholar, at pp. 112–31. Apart from this last item, there is no detailed study of these texts or of persecution in sixth-century Persia generally; for brief remarks, see idem, ‘Les martyrs persans’, 215–17; Fiey, , Jalons, 94–7Google Scholar (note, however, that Fiey incorrectly associates Mar Aba with the renewal of Roman-Persian warfare in 572, rather than 540).
57 Protector, Menander, frag. 131. 2–3 Google Scholar, refers to another Zoroastrian convert to Christianity by the name of Isaozites, who was martyred. This is likely to have fallen within Khusro's reign (531–79), since Menander's history covered the period 558/9–582; but given these chronological parameters, he ought not to be identified with Yazdpanah, martyred in 542 as Hoffmann Auszüge, 88 n. 796) suggests, or with Yazdbozid, martyred in 553, as AASS (p. 191) suggests.
58 Bedjan, , Histoire, 348 Google Scholar; Hoffmann, , Auszüge, 78 Google Scholar.
59 Bedjan, , Histoire, 374 Google Scholar; Hoffmann, , Auszüge, 82–3Google Scholar.
60 Bedjan, , Histoire, 378 Google Scholar; Hoffmann, , Auszüge, 84 Google Scholar.
61 Bedjan, , Histoire, 413 Google Scholar; Hoffmann, , Auszüge, 91 Google Scholar. Another source does, however, report Khusro as having crucified several bishops at this time; Guillaumont, , ‘Justinien et l'église’, 48 n. 46 Google Scholar.
62 Bedjan, , Histoire, 413–14Google Scholar; Hoffmann, , Auszüge, 91 Google Scholar.
63 AASS Nov. iv. 209.
64 Devos, , ‘Sainte Shirin’, 128 Google Scholar, lines 21–2.
65 Ibid. 131, lines 6–12.
66 For the Syriac text of his life, see Bedjan, , Histoire, 206–74Google Scholar; for a German translation, see Braun, O., Ausgewählte Akten persischer Märtyrer, Kempten-Munich 1915, 188–220 Google Scholar. For a detailed discussion of this text, see Peeters, P., ‘Observations sur la vie syriaque de Mar Aba’, Miscellanea Giovanni Mercati v, Rome 1946, 69–112 Google Scholar (repr. in his Recherches d'histoire et de philologie orientales, Brussels 1951, ii. 117–63)Google Scholar.
67 Chron. Seert ii. 27, P O vii. 160.
68 Chronicum Anonymum ad Annum Christi 1234 pertinens 56, ed. and trans. J.-B. Chabot, CSCO Scr. Syr. iii/14 [56, 36]. 192, line 22; Latin trans. 152, lines 2–3.
69 For Kavad's reputation, see Fiey, , Jalons, 94–5Google Scholar.
70 Fiey, , Nisibe, 51–2Google Scholar.
71 HE ii. 18, CSCO Scr. Syr. iii/3. 80, lines 9–12; trans. 58, lines 3–6. Note, however, that the initial mistreatment and imprisonment of Golinducht probably occurred in 572 (for a Latin translation of the Georgian text of her life, see Garitte, G., ‘La passion georgienne de Sainte Golindouch’, AB lxxiv [1956], 405–40Google Scholar, at pp. 426–40). Having been imprisoned in the ‘Tower of Oblivion’ by Khusro (ibid. 430 [vii. 3]), she was moved from there after eighteen years by his successor Hormizd (ibid. 431 [viii. 2]), shortly before the revolt of Vahram (ibid. 436 [xiv. 2]) which occurred in late 589.
72 Whitby, , Maurice, 252 Google Scholar.
73 Chron. 1234, 65. 202, lines 19-20; trans. 157, lines 24–5 ( Whitby, cf., Maurice, 254)Google Scholar. The clear implication is that they were regarded as a potential fifth column on account of their religious affiliation, while their removal from the city would also help reduce the drain on food stocks in the event of a siege. For expulsion from cities as a form of religious persecution, see Agapius of Membij, Universal History, trans. Vasiliev, A. A., PO viii. 439–40Google Scholar(Jews expelled from Antioch in 592–3), Socrates, , HE vii. 13 Google Scholar. 15 (Jews expelled from Alexandria and their property looted in 415), and Eusebius, , HE ix. 3 Google Scholar; 6. 1; 7. 12 (edict of Maximinus Daia in 312; Mitchell, cf. S. in JRS lxxviii [1988], 105–24Google Scholar, where [p. 121] expulsion is described as ‘the most explicit possible symbol of imperial hostility’).
74 Conrad, L. I., ‘Theophanes and the Arabic historical tradition: some indications of intercultural transmission’, Byzantinische Forschungen xv (1990), 1–44 Google Scholar, at pp. 37–42; ‘The conquest of Arwad: a source-critical study in the historiography of the early medieval Near East’, in Averil Cameron and L. I. Conrad (eds), The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East: problems in the literary sources, forthcoming. My thanks to Michael Whitby for drawing my attention to these references and their significance for the point under consideration here.
75 I adopt the phraseology of Whitby, Maurice, 214 (where it is used of the Monophysites within the Roman Empire).
76 As indicated above, I accept Michael Whitby's arguments (ibid. 257) against Evagrius' claim that the information supplied by the bishop prompted Justin's replacement of Marcian in 573. However, it seems quite reasonable both that Paul should have known about Khusro's preparations and that there should have been time for such information to be passed on to Justin, in spite of the distances involved. Persian campaign preparations in Ctesiphon were not easily disguised and took time (A. D. Lee, ‘Campaign preparations in late Roman-Persian warfare’, in French, D. H. and Lightfoot, C. S. [eds], The Eastern Frontier of the Roman Empire, Oxford 1989, 257–65Google Scholar); they must have begun during the winter, allowing at least a couple of months for news of them to reach Paul and then be passed on to Justin via Gregory (news from the frontier to Constantinople might have taken as little as ten days: Whitby, , Maurice, 256 Google Scholar n. 9). Nor would Paul have needed to operate his own espionage network in order to obtain such information: there would have been regular clerical traffic between Ctesiphon and bishops throughout the Persian Empire, and there is a wealth of evidence for clergy travelling between the Persian and Roman Empires. For some of this see Garsoïan, N., in The Cambridge History of Iran iii, Cambridge 1983, 568–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Indicative of how common a sight this was is the fact that when the Ostrogoths sent a secret embassy through Roman territory to Khusro in the 530s, the envoys adopted the guise of a bishop and his retinue, and in this way reached Persia without any questions being asked ( Procopius, , Wars ii. 2 Google Scholar. 1–3).
