Hatra

During the course of the Roman imperial period one caravan route, which took travellers through the steppes of central Mesopotamia to the north

During the Muslim period a distinction was made between al-Iraq (The South of Mesopotamia) and al-(GazIra (The North of Mesopotamia).

Funke 1996: 217—38 (esp. 225—35) discusses the role of individual Arab dynasts and dynasties in the political considerations of the rivalling powers and the systematic creation of vassal states; see also Parker 1986b; Shahid 1984a, 1984b and 1995a.

And via Singara and Edessa to Zeugma and the river Euphrates, became exceptionally popular. This route was controlled by the desert stronghold of Hatra, which flourished especially during the course of the second century.529 Although Cassius Dio claims that Hatra was still insignificant during the reign of Trajan, neither large nor prosperous, a city in the middle of the desert and with little and bad water,530 his statements somewhat disagree with Hatra’s impressive temples that were built in the early imperial period.531 The idea that Hatra did not participate in any significant long-distance trade but owed its wealth to its role as a religious centre within the region is not supported by our evidence.532 Hatra certainly lay on and profited from the trade route — already described by Strabo — that crossed the Euphrates at Zeugma and went from Mesopotamia to Babylon.533 Not least the unsuccessful attacks against the city by Trajan and Septimius Severus in the years 117 and 198/9 illustrate the powerful position Hatra had acquired by this time.534

The economic and political rise of Hatra535 is also closely linked to the administrative structures of the Parthian kingdom.536 As early as in the first century Western observers viewed the Arsacid Empire as joint regna rather than a unified state.537 Especially in the course of the second century Hatra became less dependent from Parthia and instead a loose client relationship with the Arsacid dynasty developed.538 The increased autonomy is illustrated by the fact that the lords of Hatra, who previously had called themselves ‘Sir’ (marya), now adopted the royal title (malka).539 Until the beginning of Sasanian rule in the year 224 Hatra was able to preserve this degree of autonomy and also functioned as a buffer state between the Roman and the Arsacid empires. Both in 117 and 198/99 Roman soldiers failed at conquering the city.540 Dio’s account reveals that Hatra’s political situation changed as soon as the first Sasanian king Ardasir I (224—40) had defeated the last Parthian ruler.

(i) The situation in Mesopotamia was even more alarming and caused deep anxiety among everybody, not only among people in Rome but also everywhere else.541 (2) For an Artaxerxes (= Ardasir I), a Persian, defeated the Parthians in three battles, even killed their king Artabanos542 and then marched against Hatra in order to establish a base from which he could attack the Romans. And indeed, he took the wall but lost many of his soldiers during the siege and therefore turned against Media.

The third-century historian, who was from Nicaea in Bithynia and composed a Roman history from the beginnings of the city to the year 229, informs us about Ardasir I’s attack of Hatra shortly after the change of power in Iran in 224.543 This campaign against ‘pre-Arsacid’ Hatra around 226/7, that is, before the beginning of the first Roman—Sasanian confrontations in the years 230—3, was part of the Sasanian conquest of previously Parthian territories after the foundation of the empire in 224544 and an expression of Ardasir I’s efforts to secure his own power. Cassius Dio also emphasises Hatra’s strategic importance in northern Mesopotamia as a base for further military campaigns to the West.

Apparently Hatra was not willing to acknowledge Ardasir’s sovereignty when he tried to integrate the city into the Sasanian Empire. There must have been two reasons for this; first, although Ardasir had been able to conquer all of Media he had not succeeded in doing the same to Armenia where some Medes had fled.19 From Hatra’s perspective, Parthian rule had not entirely been broken. Secondly, Hatra saw its political and economic autonomy, which the city had gained in the course of the second century, threatened by Ardasir’s desire to consolidate and centralise his rule within the Empire and to remove the power of the vassal kings.

In 226/7 Ardasir suffered a defeat outside Hatra and had to withdraw. However, his attack had long-lasting consequences because thereafter the

Hatraensians, who had been Rome’s enemies during the Arsacid period, now sought cooperation with Rome against the common opponent, the Sasanians. Rome and Hatra allied themselves in the following years545 and the city became part of the Roman defence strategy along the Eastern frontier, developments which enhanced Rome’s strategic position in northern Mesopotamia considerably. Latin inscriptions that have been found in Hatra attest the presence of Roman soldiers in the city during the reigns of Severus Alexander (222—35) and Gordian III (238—44).546 Roman activities after 230 such as the building and repair of streets and fortresses in the vicinity of Hatra further reveal Roman interest in using the city as an outpost against the Persian enemy and as part of its defence system.

The military alliance between Rome and Hatra weakened the Sasanian position in a region that was strategically important as well as from the point of view of trade. This situation inevitably provoked a reaction from the rising Eastern power and eventually Hatra was not able to withstand the Sasanian expansion of power. When the Persians conquered Hatra in the year 240547 the political balance of power in this region was affected significantly and this entailed new military confrontations. In the Roman— Sasanian peace treaty of 244 (16) the Roman emperor Philip the Arab (244—9) presumably gave up the Roman protectorate of the territory of Hatra and, urged to do so by Sapur I, recalled his troops from there.23 Ammianus Marcellinus describes the Hatra of the year 363 as an old city in the middle of the desert, which had been deserted a long time ago.24 The example of Hatra was not unique. J. Wiesehofer explains that Hatra’s fate was typical for that of buffer states between the great powers. They often rose as a result of the strategic and political interests of their patrons but as often were crushed between them.25 Not quite identical but comparable was the situation of Palmyra, which played an important role in the Iranian—Roman confrontations.