02-09-2007, 12:04 AM
Sorry for the late reply.
After Julian's death (June 26 363), the Roman army leaves Persia, but not at once.
Julian's Corps marches north under the new emperor Jovian, who concludes a shameful peace with Shapur. Sebastian's Corps meanwhile had hardly moved from its position in the north, and both armies meet near Singara, after which the united army marches past Nisibis to Antioch.
Not to winter there, because the march continues through Asia Minor, until they reach the coast before Constantinople in February. (Philostorgios VIII.8) . This later Byzantine author wrote that Jovian only commanded the sorry remains of an army that hardly survived the winter march past Ankara, indeed it would not have been more than 10% of its original strength when it entered Bythinia! However, I agree with Hoffmann in his comment, that losses of this kind (which would have been far larger than those suffered at Adrianople!) are totally unbelievable. Indeed, it is the same army that is split between Valentinian and Valens in the following summer (364), something which would have been strange if these forces formed just a band of sorry survivors, instead of the flower of the Roman army.
However, the Persian campaign was not without lossses, even when the Romans suffered no tactical defeats. Many casualties are reported on the march through Persia after Julian's death, killed by hunger and thirst, and by the forced march back across the Tigris (AM XXV.8:1-3, Zosimus III.33:1. Also Rufinus, Historia Ecclesiastica II.1, Sozomen VI.3:2).
Yet, the 'substantial losses' that Ammianus wrote about (AM XXX.8:8) must have been limited, because the Romans won every engagement with the Persians until the armistice. Ammianus is also the one who mentions that Shapur is 'good enough' to allow the Romans an unharmed retreat 'of humanitarian reasons' (AM XXV.7:6), something he would hardly have done if the Roman force had been within his power to destroy!
After Julian's death (June 26 363), the Roman army leaves Persia, but not at once.
Julian's Corps marches north under the new emperor Jovian, who concludes a shameful peace with Shapur. Sebastian's Corps meanwhile had hardly moved from its position in the north, and both armies meet near Singara, after which the united army marches past Nisibis to Antioch.
Not to winter there, because the march continues through Asia Minor, until they reach the coast before Constantinople in February. (Philostorgios VIII.8) . This later Byzantine author wrote that Jovian only commanded the sorry remains of an army that hardly survived the winter march past Ankara, indeed it would not have been more than 10% of its original strength when it entered Bythinia! However, I agree with Hoffmann in his comment, that losses of this kind (which would have been far larger than those suffered at Adrianople!) are totally unbelievable. Indeed, it is the same army that is split between Valentinian and Valens in the following summer (364), something which would have been strange if these forces formed just a band of sorry survivors, instead of the flower of the Roman army.
However, the Persian campaign was not without lossses, even when the Romans suffered no tactical defeats. Many casualties are reported on the march through Persia after Julian's death, killed by hunger and thirst, and by the forced march back across the Tigris (AM XXV.8:1-3, Zosimus III.33:1. Also Rufinus, Historia Ecclesiastica II.1, Sozomen VI.3:2).
Yet, the 'substantial losses' that Ammianus wrote about (AM XXX.8:8) must have been limited, because the Romans won every engagement with the Persians until the armistice. Ammianus is also the one who mentions that Shapur is 'good enough' to allow the Romans an unharmed retreat 'of humanitarian reasons' (AM XXV.7:6), something he would hardly have done if the Roman force had been within his power to destroy!
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
