Ammianus, miles quondam et Graecus (Amm. 31.16.9), dealt at length with the Persians in the context of the conflicts between the two empires in the 350s and 360s.173 As a Roman officer, who had fought them and participated in Julian’s Persian expedition (363), Ammianus knew the Sasanians at first hand. His Res Gestae are famous for their digressions, in particular those on geography and ethnography. His longest digression, some 18 pages in the Teubner edition, is devoted to persia and the Persians (23.6) and forms part of his elaborate description of Julian’s campaign in the heartland of the sasanid Empire.174 175
The main section of the digression contains a geographical description of the persian Empire and its various provinces, but Ammianus also presents a short survey of persian history and an ethnography. In the latter he describes the appearance, character, and customs of the persians. they are slight in build, have a darkish and bloodless complexion, goat’s eyes, and a grim expression. They have beards, wear their hair long, and their eyebrows are curved in a semicircle and meet in the middle. Most are inordinately addicted to sex and have, according to their means, several wives or concubines, but do not practice pederasty. they are frugal eaters and “the luxury of an elegant table and especially indulgence in drink they shun like the plague.”11 Only the king has fixed hours for dining; all others eat when they are hungry, but never to excess. Besides being modest in eating, they avoid unseemly actions; one will never see a persian pass water standing up or withdraw to answer a call of nature.176 on the other hand they are so careless and undisciplined in their movements that one might think them effeminate. They talk extravagantly and are full of empty words; they are disgustingly boastful and given to threats. they are cunning, proud, and cruel, and claim the power of life and death over slaves and common people. they flay men alive, and the servants who wait on them at table are not allowed to open their mouths, either to speak or to spit. They have great respect for their laws, which are severe. Persian judges are men of experience and integrity, and need no others to advise them. Ammianus remarks that they “laugh at our [i. e. the Roman] custom of giving unlearned judges eloquent assessors who are thoroughly versed in public law.”177 They are formidable warriors and could have put many other peoples under their yoke besides those whom they had fully subdued, had they not been constantly harassed by domestic and foreign wars. they dress in garments of various gleaming colors, which, though open in front and at the sides, never expose any part of their body. After their victory over Lydia and Croesus they began to wear gold arm rings and necklaces, and especially pearls, which they have in great quantities.
This description clearly emphasizes the “otherness” of the persians.178 the Persian national vices, as seen by Greeks and Romans, receive especially ample attention: sexual intemperance, cruelty, arrogance, effeminacy, violence, garrulity, constant domestic strife, and foreign wars. However, ammianus apparently had aspirations to objectivity since he also mentioned the Persians’ virtues: their avoidance of excessive eating and drinking, their moderation, their professional judicial system, and, above all, their military training and discipline and expertise in warfare. ammianus, a soldier himself, admired the Sasanian military qualities, although he criticizes them for not always fighting in an organized fashion, for lacking endurance in battle, and for not being good in one-on-one combat. ammianus’ description, predominantly based on written sources, clearly bears the Herodotean imprint; he characterized the persians in many respects as inferior to the Greco-Romans and in that sense displays the usual condescension found in the ancient Greek and Roman sources toward the Persian Oriental. Interestingly enough, nowhere in his work does he use the term “barbarian” to designate the persians, an epithet that he did apply to Huns, for example, or to Germans, Sarmatians, Isaurians, and Berbers.179
Of interest is Ammianus’ image of the Persian king Sapor II (309-379). although ammianus admires his military achievements and calls him “victor in wars,”180 Sapor is a harsh and cruel ruler,181 unrestrained in his greed,182 short-tempered and rude,183 savage,184 and pompous.185 Furthermore, Ammianus calls him arrogant,186 shrewd,187 and a man with a fondness for plundering.188 several times Ammianus accuses the Persian king of treachery and dishonesty.189 But the most frequently mentioned negative quality is rage.190 The presentation of the sasanian king is clearly the opposite of the ideal picture of the Roman emperor, who ought to be philanthropic, just, moderate, mild, and gentle.191
Ammianus thus gives a nuanced depiction of the persians. on the one hand the picture has points of contact with common characteristics ascribed to barbarians by ammianus: they are irrational, savage, unreliable, not human but bestial; they quarrel with their allies, fight all the time, are divided among themselves, and do not know the difference between good and evil.192 on the other hand ammianus does not explicitly call the persians barbarians and they have a special position in his work. They are certainly not described as one of the many marginal peoples whose character and habits differed completely from the Greco-Roman standard. their barbarism was certainly not like that of northern and western barbarians, who were uncivilized in every respect. However, just like these barbarians the Persians were different from Greeks and Romans, and Ammianus emphasized their otherness. The fact that Ammianus did not label the Persians as common barbarians may have something to do with his personal knowledge of the Sasanid Empire. He clearly admired the military virtues of the sasanians and may also have had admiration for their political and judicial system. However, as a historian Ammianus was forced to keep to the age-old general and stereotypical categories of peoples in his ethnographical digressions, in spite of the fact that he may have known from his own experience that these received ideas were not necessarily accurate.
World History
