[Previous][Contents][Next]


though the versions of it differ in Malalas, Ammianus, and the SHA. After all, the evidence which suggests that he was still alive in A.D. 260 and after, and still a tool in the hands of Shapuhr, is slight and controversial.53

And finally the activity of Sampsiceramus (if he be identical with Uranius Antoninus) in Hemesa, mentioned both by Orac. Sib. XIII and Malalas, is exactly dated by his coins. He was no longer ruler of Hemesa after A.D. 254.53a

Easier to date are the events described with a wealth of details by Philostratus. They contain chiefly a report on the invasion of Syria and Asia Minor by Shapuhr. Though the battle of Edessa and the capture of Valerian are not mentioned in the excerpt used by Malalas, the description of the invasion refers certainly to the second invasion of Shapuhr, that of A.D. 260. This point is proved by the many coincidences in this report with the description by Shapuhr of his third campaign, that is to say the second invasion of Syria. We are told for example that Shapuhr, after having taken and burnt the whole of Syria , "burned" Cilicia and that finally he returned through Cappadocia, . Cilicia, I may remind the reader, is never mentioned in Shapuhr's report on his first invasion of Syria, while its invasion and the capture of its cities and of some cities of Cappadocia loom large in Shapuhr's report on his second invasion. I may add that some of the names of Cilician cities mentioned by Shapuhr as captured by him in his second invasion recur in the report of Philostratus-Malalas.54

After the quotation from Philostratus analyzed above, Malalas returns to the report of Domninus, his chief source, and gives valuable information on one episode of the second invasion of Shapuhr.

Much shorter but in general similar to that of Malalas is the account of the events in Syria given by Syncellus (p. 715, ed. Bonn). He deals first with an invasion of Syria by Shapuhr in a very brief form: (cf. the similarly worded entry in the Liber Chalipharum, above, p. 32). In these few words he appears to describe the first invasion of Shapuhr. As in the report of Zosimus and in the account of Shapuhr himself the campaign is presented as a large-scale raid. Moreover Syncellus in describing the scope of the campaign of Shapuhr mentions Cappadocia but not Cilicia. This is in complete agreement with the account of Shapuhr of his first


53. The point is disputed. Those who recognize Mareades as the person in Roman dress who stands near Shapuhr on his triumphal bas-reliefs of after A.D. 260 (see A. T. Olmstead, loc. cit. p. 399) will regard the reports on his death after the first invasion of Syria as a legend or an invention. However the identification of the standing figure of Shapuhr's bas-reliefs with Mareades is far from certain and contradicts the unanimous reports on his death of our extant literary sources. But , even if Mareades was still alive in A.D. 260 and the reports on his death were inventions, he certainly played no active part in the events and was just an eventual tool in the hands of Shapuhr. On the bas-reliefs see above, n. 7.

   

53a. See, on the coins of Uranius Antoninus, A. R. Bellinger, below, pp. 61 ff.
54. It is worthy of note that Philostratus in his list assigns to Cilicia three cities of Northern Syria: Alexandria, Rhossus and Nicopolis. of these three cities Rhossus is never mentioned in the reports of Shapuhr while Alexandria and Nicopolis appear twice, once in the report of the second


[Previous][Contents][Next]


Created by the Digital Documentation Center at AUB in collaboration with Al Mashriq of Høgskolen i Østfold, Norway.

990129MB - Email: hseeden@aub.edu.lb