Following the capture of Antioch it is proposed that the Persian army split up again and made a series of raids directed at a number of cities.231 The
Figure 5.15 The modern city and harbour of Alexandretta (Alexandria ad-Issum).
Cities as they appear in the SKZ following the capture of Antioch are as follows:
Cyrrhus, Seleucia, Alexandretta, Nicopolis, Sinzara, Chamath, Ariste, Dikhor, Doliche, Doura, Circesium, Germanicia, Batna, Chanar and in Cappadocia, Satala, Domana, Artangil, Souisa and Phreata.232
The listing of Cyrrhus after Antioch and the identification of Seleucia as Seleucia Pieria have already been discussed. It appears that one division took the cities of Alexandria ad Issum (Alexandretta) and Nicopolis in Cilicia, while another marched south along the Orontes and captured Sinzara (Larissa), Chamath (Epiphania) and Ariste (Arethusa).233 Dichor, Doliche and Germanicia to the north-east of Antioch were attacked by another division.
The order of these cities in the SKZ is the most problematic section with regard to the reconstruction of the course of Shapur’s first Syrian campaign. Following its capture, Antioch seems to have been used as a base from which to launch attacks on the cities not captured before and also from which to organize the Persian withdrawal.234 The order in which the
Figure 5.16 The port city of Seleucia-Pieria with Mt Casius in the background.
Nine cities were listed after Antioch and up to Doliche is somewhat jumbled. Rather than retreat as one large force, the Persian army probably broke up into smaller divisions, some heading north and others heading south before returning to Persia. The cities listed from Cyrrhus to Doliche were probably captured during the withdrawal. They appear in a loose order as they were taken by a divided, retreating army that no longer had the strategic aim of capturing Antioch. Three groups of cities can be identified as being taken in this manner. Alexandretta and Nicopolis are listed in one group. Sinzara, Chamath and Ariste are listed in another, while Dikhor and Doliche appear in another separate group.
Some details of the Persian withdrawal were recorded in the ancient texts and they appear to confirm the suggestion of cities being captured after the withdrawal from Antioch. Zosimus reported that the Persians captured Antioch and returned home without meeting any opposition.235 Malalas quoted Philostratus as saying that after Shapur had captured Antioch and other cities he launched a separate attack on Cilicia, capturing Alexandretta and Nicopolis as the SKZ indicates.236 Malalas also stated that Rhosus, Anazarbus and Aigai were captured, but these cities are not listed in the SKZ. According to Malalas, the Persians returned home via Cappadocia, which was when the cities of Satala, Domana, Artangil, Souisa and Phreata - all listed at the end of the SKZ’s list of cities captured in the first Syrian campaign - were probably captured. The passage of Philostratus quoted by Malalas is important as it is the only confirmation in the Roman sources of the capture of individual cities that were also listed in the SKZ. It also indicates that not all of the cities captured by the Persians were necessarily listed in the SKZ and that the SKZ need not be interpreted as literally as it sometimes has been.
The order of the list is also problematic with regard to the appearance of Dura and Circesium. As discussed earlier, it is now thought that Dura fell twice - once during the first part of Shapur’s campaign up the Euphrates and the second time in 256/257. The later listing of both Dura and Circesium may indicate that there was a separate attack on this section of the middle Euphrates, which the Romans seem to have recaptured after the initial phase of Shapur’s invasion. The capture of Germani-cia, Batna and Chanar in northern Syria was possibly also the result of a later and separate attack.
It is argued on the basis of Oracula Sibyllina XIII that a new and separate Persian invasion following the capture of Antioch and surrounding cities was undertaken and that this saw the defeat of Persian forces at Emesa.237 The Persian invasion of Syria that saw the capture of Antioch was predicted in lines 119-36 of the oracle. Events in Gaul and Pannonia and the rise and fall of Aemilius Aemilianus, who died in August 253 were covered in lines 137-46.238 Lines 147-54 then predict:
Again the world will be no world with men destroyed in plague and war. The Persians will again rush to the moil of Ares raging against the Ausonians. Then there will be a rout of the Romans; but immediately thereafter a priest will come, the last of all, sent from the sun, appearing from Syria, and he will do everything by craft; the city of the sun will arise, and around her the Persians will endure the terrible threats of Phoenicians.239
Line 155 makes a clear reference to the joint rule of Valerian and Gal-lienus, which commenced late in 253. The oracle, therefore, makes a distinction between the Persian campaign, which saw the capture of Antioch under Trebonianus Gallus, and a later campaign, which came after the brief reign of Aemilius Aemilianus and shortly before the beginning of the joint reign of Valerian and Gallienus. This would date such a campaign to the last half of 253. The nature of this campaign and its separation from the campaign in which Antioch fell depends on the dating of the fall of Antioch to 252 or 253. If it was the latter, such a campaign would have taken place within a few months of Antioch’s capture, but if it was the former it suggests that Antioch was held by the Persians for some time or that they returned in the following year.
Earlier scholarship regarding this reference suggested that the resistance came from Odenathus of Palmyra, but it is now thought that it came from the city of Emesa.240 Uranius Antoninus has been identified as a usurper based at Emesa at this time on the strength of coins minted in his name at the city in 253/254.241 A passage of Malalas claims a Persian loss at Emesa following the capture of Antioch and that this was inflicted under the leadership of a priest of Aphrodite named Sampsigeramus.242 The Sampsigeramids were the old Emesene royal family and it seems that Uranius Antoninus styled himself as a new Sampsigeramid king of Emesa.243 He took advantage of the weakness of Valerian and Gallienus’ position at this point by usurping imperial authority. The Roman emperors Caracalla, Geta, Elagabalus and Severus Alexander, from earlier in the third century, had strong links with Emesa. Caracalla and Geta were the maternal grandsons of Julius Bassianus, the high priest of Elagabal and reputedly a direct descendant of Sampsigera-mus, the last king of independent Emesa who died c.66bc.244 Elagabalus and Severus Alexander were the great-grandsons of Bassianus. The king of Emesa had also been the high priest of the cult of Elagabal at the city. Considerable research has been conducted on the figure of Uranius Antoninus and his leadership of an Emesene resistance to this new Persian invasion.245 It appears that Uranius Antoninus drew on Emesa’s past religious importance and its close links with the Severan dynasty of the early third century in an attempt to establish some form of legitimacy.
A victory over Persian forces by Uranius Antoninus at this time would have afforded him great prestige. Oracula Sibyllina XIII predicted that the Persian defeat at Emesa would be preceded by Roman losses and that this would cause some to flee. This campaign may reflect the series of smaller campaigns apparent in the SKZ, directed against cities in the vicinity of Antioch following its capture. Sinzara, Chamath and Ariste could have been the cities taken in the lead-up to the failed attack on Emesa.246 The capture and deportation of populations from the important nearby legionary bases at Apamea and Rephanea during the first phase of the invasions would have made this task more achievable. The leadership that individuals such as Uranius Antoninus and Odenathus of Palmyra provided in challenging the Persian invaders attracted greater hope and confidence from locals than the emperors were able to achieve.247
World History
