In AD 37, at the instruction of Tiberius, Vitellius met with Artabanus II on the Euphrates to discuss an offer of friendship to the Parthian king following recent disturbances in Armenia.43 A pontoon bridge was constructed and the two met in the middle of the river surrounded by each other’s bodyguard. King Herod then entertained Vitellius and Artabanus in a pavilion constructed for the purpose. Another meeting between Roman and Parthian representatives was held at Zeugma in 49, which is discussed below, and in 71 Vespasian’s son Titus met with a deputation from Volo-gaeses I at Zeugma where he was presented with a golden crown in recognition of his recent victory over the Jews.44 The symbolism of these meetings is clearly reflective of the meeting between Gaius and Phraates V at the beginning of the first century. In its upper reaches the Euphrates retained its significance throughout the first half of the first century AD as a symbolic boundary between Roman and Parthian interests, as it had during the reign of Augustus.
The bridge crossing at Zeugma/Apamea was an important element in the Euphrates acting as a boundary between Roman and Parthian interests. Zeugma’s importance as a crossing for troops dates back to the Seleucid period, and its potential military importance to the Romans was indicated when Gaius Cassius Longinus, governor of Syria, placed a camp there in 49.45 The camp appears to have been temporary and was established when Cassius conducted Meherdates, a pro-Roman claimant to the Parthian throne, to Zeugma where they were met by Parthian nobles as well as the kings of Osrhoene and Adiabene.46 The rival claimant, Gotarzes, was anti-Roman and succeeded in gaining the support of the Osrhoenian and Adiabenian kings whose allegiance was initially thought to be with the Romans. Gotarzes was successful and Meherdates’ supporters fled. It is significant that Zeugma acted as the meeting place for the rulers of the lands on both sides of the river and indicates further that this section of the Euphrates was mutually recognized as a boundary.47 For Cassius it probably represented the boundary of the province of Syria, and for Osrhoene it represented part of the kingdom’s western boundary - which was probably the case in the first century BC.
The war with Parthia over Armenia, which occupied the middle years of Nero’s reign, culminated in his crowning of Tiridates, the Roman nominee to the Armenian throne, in 65.48 This is the immediate background to Vespasian’s reorganization of territory to the south and west of Armenia, which is discussed on pp. 18-20.49 In the negotiations between Rome and Parthia after the war, Tacitus reported that the Parthians requested the Romans to withdraw to the Euphrates, as was the case before the war.50 While there is no evidence that Nero accepted this as a condition of the settlement, it is an indication of the status quo up to this point and is reflective of the Parthian request put to Pompey 130 years earlier.51 During the conflict between Rome and Parthia over Armenia, Nero’s general, Corbulo, crossed the Euphrates and occupied the opposite bank before coming under attack from the Parthians and withdrawing to the other side.52 Tacitus reported that Corbulo erected a line of defences so that a pontoon bridge could be constructed to facilitate the crossing.53 When Corbulo later marched from Syria to confront the Parthians in Armenia, he left part of his forces to hold forts on the Euphrates.54 These were probably the defences he had constructed when the Euphrates was bridged.
A major reorganization of territory on the upper Euphrates took place in the reign of Vespasian and resulted in the long-term establishment of Roman forces on or close to the Euphrates for the first time. This was part of a broader reorganization of the eastern client-kingdoms into formally administered territory.55 This reorganization saw the province of Cappadocia receive a garrison, and it resulted in the incorporation of the client-kingdom of Commagene into the province of Syria, forming part of Vespasian’s wider reorganization of the eastern provinces after the capture of Judaea in 70/71.56 This was not the first time that a reorganization of territory on the upper Euphrates had taken place in the first century AD, but in earlier times it had not been accompanied by fortifications and troops.57 In the reign of Tiberius the client-kingdoms of Cappadocia and Commagene were converted into provincial territory, but Commagene reverted to client-kingdom status again under Caligula and Claudius.58 In 54, the kingdom of Sophene, on the left bank of the Euphrates between Armenia and Osrhoene, became a Roman client-kingdom, reflecting Roman moves to increase its influence on the other side of the Euphrates.59 The Roman approach to the client-kingdoms on the Euphrates clearly vacillated in the first half of the first century AD until Vespasian’s more decisive actions settled the situation in the long term and marked Roman intentions to extend power in territory that was more under Parthian influence.
World History
