Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T20:49:42.612Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Procopius and Dara*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

Brian Croke  and
James Crow
Brian Croke
Affiliation:
Sydney
James Crow
Affiliation:
The National Trust, Hadrian's Wall Estate
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The question of the degree of continuity in urban life from antiquity into later times has recently emerged as a preoccupation among scholars of the late antique and early medieval periods. Considerable attention is currently being devoted to the fate of the classical city and of the traditional patterns of urban life, with special reference to features such as reduction of physical area in individual cities, decline of population, changes in use or physical decay of classical buildings and the emergence of new social organizations as reflected in urban topography and development. Attempts to refine and analyse these issues with greater precision have largely stemmed from the recent upsurge of interest in late Roman archaeology, well demonstrated in such major excavations as those at Sardis, Aphrodisias, Caesarea, Carthage, Ephesus and Thessalonika. Yet the archaeological evidence can only tell part of the story. We must still rely a great deal on literary evidence, and the interconnection of the literary and the archaeological material is the subject of this article.

For all studies of late antique cities the single most important contemporary literary text is the Buildings, or De Aedificiis, of Procopius of Caesarea. Where it provides (as often) the only literary evidence for a particular site we need to be able to evaluate its contribution critically. So far there have been remarkably few detailed discussions of the value of its evidence either from the literary or the archaeological standpoint. As a result, the traditional view that the reign of Justinian witnessed a major effort to secure and refortify the defences of the eastern frontier, based on the information provided by Procopius, still largely holds the field, despite the availability of other sources of information which could be used to clarify Procopius' picture.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 73 , November 1983 , pp. 143 - 159
Copyright
Copyright © Brian Croke and James Crow 1983. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See, for example, Kazhdan, A. and Cutler, A., ‘Continuity and Discontinuity in Byzantine History’, Byzantion, 52 (1982), 437 ff.Google Scholar; more generally, Hodges, R., Dark Age Economics. The Origins of Towns and Trade (1982)Google Scholar.

2 For an independent view and a guide to recent literature see Cameron, Averil, ‘Images of Authority: Elites and Icons in Late Sixth-century Byzantium’, Past and Present 84 (1979), 3–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar (reprinted in Continuity and Change in Sixth-century Byzantium, 1981); and P. Brown, ‘A Dark Age Crisis: Aspects of the Iconoclastic Controversy’, EHR 88 (1973), 1–34 (reprinted in Society and the Holy in Late Antiquity (1982), 251–301).

3 Bibliography on individual cities in Stillwell, R. (ed.), The Princeton Encyclopaedia of Classical Sites (1976)Google Scholar and subsequently in the annual volumes of Arch. Bibl.

4 This gives rise to such typical statements as that of J. A. S. Evans to the effect that the Buildings ‘provides a full and remarkably accurate account of Justinian's building programme’ (Procopius (1972), 77). Soon to appear is a major new study of Procopius: Averil Cameron, Procopius and the Sixth Century. In the meantime the best guide to Procopius and his Buildings is B. Rubin, ‘Prokopios von Kaisareia’, RE 23. 1 (1957), 572–87 and Das Zeitalter Justinians I (1960), 175–7Google Scholar; see too the commentary by Pülhorn, W. in Veh's, O. German translation of the Buildings (1977)Google Scholar.

5 e.g. Krautheimer, R., Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture (1981), 271Google Scholar: ‘The security of the Empire under Justinian and his successors entailed a vast building programme lasting until the turn of the century … Procopius presents an impressive picture of the building programme’; or Brown, P., The World of Late Antiquity (1971), 154:Google Scholar ‘From the Black Sea to Damascus the emperor's foresight was crystallized in stone’. An archaeologist's view may be represented by Wheeler, R. E. M., ‘The Roman Frontier in Mesopotamia’, The Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, ed. Birley, E. (1949), 124Google Scholar: ‘Here in the Buildings is a documented basis for the study of sixth-century fortification, with which the fieldworker must familiarize himself at the outset’.

6 G. Downey, ‘The Composition of Procopius’ De Aedificiis', Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. 78 (1947), 171–3. For the question of the date: Stein, E., Histoire du Bas-Empire II (1949), 837Google Scholar; and for the emperor's reputation as a builder: Irmscher, J., ‘Justinian als Bauherr in der Sicht der Literatur seiner Epoche’, Klio 59 (1977), 225–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Downey, G., ‘Justinian as a Builder’, Art Bulletin 22 (1950), 262–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Downey, G., ‘Notes on Procopius, De Aedificiis, Book I’, Studies Presented to David M. Robinson 2 (1953). 719–25Google Scholar.

8 cf. Perrin-Henry, M., ‘La Place des listes toponymiques dans l'organisation du livre IV des Edifices de Procope’, Geographica Byzantina (Byzantina Sorboniensia 3, 1980), 93–106Google Scholar.

9 Except now for Averil Cameron, op. cit. (n. 4 above), chap. 4.

10 For Sergiopolis: Karnapp, W., Die Stadtmauer von Resafa in Syrien (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Denkmäler Antiker Architektur 11) (1976)Google Scholar; for Zenobia: Lauffray, J., ‘El-Khanouqa, préliminaires géographiques à la publication des fouilles faites à Zenobia par le Service des Antiquités de Syrie’, Annales Archéologiques de Syrie 1 (1951), 41–58Google Scholar. See also the plan of the towers in Karnapp, figs.

11 The literature on Dara is limited. See especially Ensslin, W., ‘Zur Gründungsgeschichte von Dara-Anastasiopolis’, Byz.-neugriech. Jb. 5 (1927), 342–7Google Scholar; Collinet, P., ‘Une “ville neuve ” byzantine en 507: La fondation de Daras (Anastasiopolis) en Mésopotamie’, Mélanges offerts à G. Schlumberger (1924) I 55–60Google Scholar; Capizzi, C., L'imperatore Anastasio (Or. Christ. Anal. 184, 1969), 216–21Google Scholar (includes further bibliography). For the remains at Dara (all with plates): Preusser, C., Nordmesopotamische Baudenkmäler. Altchristlicher und islamischer Zeit (Wiss. Veröffent. d. deutschen Orient. Ges. 17) (1911), 44–5, fig. 12, pls. 54–7Google Scholar; Mango, C., Byzantine Architecture (1976), 24, 39Google Scholar; M. Mundell, ‘A Sixth Century Funerary Relief at Dara in Mesopotamia’, Jahrb. d. Öst. Byz. 24 (1975), 209–27 and Crow, J. G., ‘Dara. A Late Roman Fortress in Mesopotamia’, Yayla 4 (1981), 12–20Google Scholar.

12 G. Downey, ‘Procopius on Antioch: A Study of Method in the De Aedificiis’, Byz. 14 (1939), 362.

13 Downey, op. cit. (n. 12), 361–78. The much vaunted Justinianic restoration appears to have fared no better than its predecessors, for in 573 the walls had largely collapsed (Evagr., HE 5. 9).

14 At least it is mentioned as complete in a letter of June 519 (Coll. Avell. 218, pp. 679–80).

15 Patria in. 166 (Preger, 267). There is no reason to prefer the evidence of Procopius to that of the Patria as does PLRE 2 (1980), xxxvii, s.v. ‘Eutropius’. Eutropius' ‘protospatharios and quaestor’ may be more accurately assigned to the early fourth century (Janin, R., Constantinople byzantine2 (1964), 238–9Google Scholar).

16 Jo. Styl. 58. It was earlier the headquarters of the legion I Parthica (Not. Dig. Or. XXXVI. 29 (Seeck, 78)). The fortifications were constructed in the early fourth century by Constantius Caesar at the same time as the work at Amida (Amm. Marc. 18. 9. 1). For a description of the defences see Taylor, J. G., ‘Journal of a Tour in Armenia, Kurdistan and Upper Mesopotamia with notes of Researches in the Deyrsim Dagh in 1866’, Journ. Royal Geog. Soc. 38 (1868), 281–361, esp. 354CrossRefGoogle Scholar; much less survives to be seen today.

17 Also the headquarters of the legion IV Parthica (Not. Dig. Or. xxxv. 24 (Seeck, 76)).

18 E. Honigmann, RE IV A, 1716 s.v. ‘Syria’.

19 Lauffray, op. cit. (n. 10). See comments by Karnapp, op. cit. (n. 10), 28 n. 99.

20 Karnapp, op. cit., 51–3.

21 The legion involved was XV Apollinaris (Not. Dig. Or. XXXVIII 13 (Seeck 84)) with RE 2 (1921), 59 s.v. ‘Satala’. For the remains see Mitford, T. B., ‘Roman Frontier in Cappadocia’ in Haupt, D. and Horn, H. G., Studien zu den Militärgrenzen Roms II (1977), 501–16Google Scholar.

22 IGL Syr. 2, 348, 349. For the defences see Mouterde, R. and Poidebard, A., Le Limes de Chalcis, Organisation de la Steppe en Haute Syrie Romaine (Bibl. arch, et hist., 38) (1945), 8–9, pl. 1Google Scholar.

23 van Berchem, D., ‘Recherches sur la chronologie des enceintes de Syrie et de Mésopotamie’, Syria 31 (1954), 254–70, esp. 262–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See, however Gabriel, A., Voyages archéologiques dans la Turquie orientale (1940), 134–5, 175–82Google Scholar and Oates, D., Studies in the Ancient History of Northern Iraq (1968), 103–6Google Scholar.

24 Barnea, I., ‘Nouvelle Contribution à l'histoire de la Dobrudja sous Anastase Ier’, Dacia n.s. 11 (1967), 355–6Google Scholar; Velkov, V., Cities in Thrace and Dacia in Late Antiquity (1977), 47, 108, 213Google Scholar and Crow, J. G., ‘The Late Roman Frontier of Lower Moesia’, in The Frontiers of the Roman Empire (forthcoming)Google Scholar.

25 Barnea, I., ‘Contributions to Dobrudja History under Anastasius I’, Dacia n.s. 4 (1960), 363–74Google Scholar.

26 Karnapp, op. cit. (n. 10).

27 Cameron, Averil, ‘Byzantine Africa—the Literary Evidence’, in University of Michigan Excavations at Carthage VII (1982), 31, 33–6.Google Scholar

28 Many of the Syrian defences are discussed in Liebeschuetz, W., ‘The Defences of Syria in the sixth century’, Studien zu den Militärgrenzen Roms II (n. 21 above), 490–3Google Scholar, with references to the archaeological evidence.

29 IGL Syr. 4, 1809 (dated to 547/8).

30 IGL Syr. 2, 348, 349 (dated to 550).

31 IGL Syr. 1, 145, 146, 147 (dated to c. 542).

32 Liebeschuetz, op, cit. (n. 28), 495–9.

33 Pringle, D., The Defence of Byzantine Africa from Justinian to the Arab Conquest (B.A.R. 99), 1980Google Scholar. See also Durliat, J., Les dédicaces d'ouvrages de defense dans l'Afrique byzantine (Coll. de l'Ecole française de Rome 49) (1981)Google Scholar, where one finds in the inscriptions from the reign of Justinian (Nos. 1–23) the same tendency to exaggerate by representing a reconstruction or partial construction as a complete one (e.g. No. 9, with commentary, pp. 110–1 (cf. ILS831)).

34 Claude, D., Die byzantinische Stadt im 6. Jahrhundert (1969), 137–8Google Scholar; A. J. Festugière, ‘La vie de Sabas et les tours de Syrie-Palestine’, Rev. Bibl. 70 (1963), 92–3.

35 Liebeschuetz, op. cit. (n. 28). Although recognizing a contraction in the military forces in Syria, Liebeschuetz (491) maintains confidence in Procopius as a source, and regrets that the Buildings ‘becomes increasingly selective so that the fortifications of Euphratensis do not include mere forts’.

36 IGL Syr. 4, 1809.

37 Frézouls, E. in Baity, J., Apamée de Syrie. Bilan de recherches archéologiques 1965–1968 (1969), 90 n. 2Google Scholar. The original location of this inscription is unknown; it was found reused in the cardo.

38 E. Frézouls, ‘Recherches sur la ville de Cyrrhus’, Ann. Arab. Arch. Syrienne 3/4 (1954), 106–11.

39 Reduction at Leptis Magna (6. 4. 2–3) and Caesarea (5. 4. 7–14); movement uphill at Mocissus (5. 4. 15–18) and Bizana (3. 5. 15).

40 Capizzi, op. cit. (n. 11), 217–8 summarizes the sources.

41 In the dry season of 1903 British military observers reported that Dara was the only watering point suitable for military purposes between Nisibis and Mardin (Admiralty War Staff Intelligence Division, A Handbook of Mesopotamia IV. Northern Mesopotamia and Central Kurdistan (1917), 268). Parry, O. H., Six months in a Syrian monastery (1895), 159Google Scholar, notes that Dara is one of the best watered villages in Mesopotamia.

42 Honigmann, E., Die Ostgrenze des byzantinischen Reichs (1935), 11 n. 6Google Scholar.

43 M. Restle, ‘Viranşehir-Kaleköy, ein befestiger Platz in Kappadokien’, Jahrb. d. Ost. Byz. 24 (1975), 196–207.

44 Zach. Mit., HE 7. 6 with Capizzi, op. cit. (n. 11), 217–8.

45 Marcell. com. Chron. (MGH. AA. XI, 100) with Croke, B., ‘Marcellinus and Dara: A Fragment of his lost de temporum qualitatibus et positionibus locorum’, Phoenix 37 (1983)Google Scholar.

46 Jo. Mal. 399. 15–17; Evagr., HE 3. 37; Zach. Mit., HE 7. 6.

47 Jo. Mal. 399. 20; Procop., , Wars 1. 22. 3Google Scholar.

48 Liebeschuetz, op. cit. (n. 28), 487–99, esp. 498.

49 Menander, fr. 15 (FHG IV 220).

50 Jo. Eph., HE (Payne-Smith, 382–3) with Goubert, P., Byzance avant l'Islam 1 (1951), 69–71Google Scholar.

51 Theoph. Sim. 3. 11. 2–3; Mich. Syr. (Chabot 11, 312).

52 Theoph. Sim. 5. 3. 10 with Goubert, op. cit. (n. 50), 167–8.

53 Stratos, A., Byzantium in the Seventh Century I. 610–34 (1968), 61–2Google Scholar.

54 Theophanes A. M. 6130 (de Boor, 340. 25) with Stratos, A., Byzantium in the Seventh Century II. 634–41 (1972). 85Google Scholar.

55 R. Janin, ‘Dara’, Diet, d'hist. et de geog. eccl. 14, 83–4; Mundell, op. cit. (n. 11), 225–7.

56 A list of some of the travellers' accounts of Dara is to be found in Mundell, op. cit. (n. 11), 212 ff. Photographs taken by Gertrude Bell are a valuable record of the site seventy years ago. These are now kept in the Bell Collection, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Photographs from a more recent exploration of Dara by Cyril Mango, Ihor Ševčenko and Marlia Mundell Mango are housed in the Byzantine Photographic Collection at Dumbarton Oaks, Washington D.C.

57 Croke, op. cit. (n. 45).

58 Procopius notes that the earlier walls were too low at a number of sites: 2. 5. 2 (Constantina); 3. 5. 6 (Theodosiopolis (Erzerum), with the restoration described as similar to that at Data (3. 5. 10–12)); 3. 2. 10 (Martyropolis). That the walls had been poorly built is a common assertion, e.g. at Amida (2. 3. 27–8), Constantina (2. 5. 2), Chalkis (2. 9. 1) and Hemerium (2. 9. 10), where the walls were rebuilt in hard stone. Excavations at Dibsi Faraj-Neocaesarea showed that the earlier towers built of a soft limestone were encased in new walls of conglomerate and brick (R. P. Harper, ‘Excavations at Dibsi Faraj, northern Syria, 1972–1974: a preliminary note on the site and its monuments’, DOP 29 (1975), 319–37, esp. 326–8). The rebuilding is dated after 453 and may be Justinianic in date.

59 In his account of the siege of 540, Procopius states (Wars 2. 13. 16) that the Persian siege tunnel lay to the east, the only approachable side. He tacitly corrects this in the Buildings (2. 1. 24).

60 This mound was probably a tell, the remains of earlier settlement on the site. The plain south of Dara is still filled by the remains of prehistoric and later settlements of this form.

61 6. 7. 18 (written and oral sources); 2. 4. 1–5 (based on direct local experience). Archival material is probably the source of his detailed lists (4. 9; 4. 11), cf. Perrin-Henry, op. cit. (n. 8.)

62 See the photographs in Mango, op. cit. (n. 11), pl. 37 and in Hill, S. J., Gertrude Bell (1868–1926) (1976), fig. 10Google Scholar. The blocking of these windows is probably post-Roman, when the tower was converted for domestic use.

63 Similar open stairs behind the towers are known from Amida and Sergiopolis. For Amida see Gabriel, op. cit. (n. 23), 96 ff. and for Sergiopolis, Karnapp, op. cit. (n. 10). Staircases at the rear of towers, on the inside, are found at Zenobia (Karnapp, op. cit.), Dibsi Faraj (Harper, op. cit. (n. 58), fig. c) and Antioch (Rey, G., Etude sur les monuments de l'architecture militaire des croisés en Syrie et dans l'Ile de Chypre (1871), 188–9, figs. 48, 49)Google Scholar. It is unlikely that there is any significant difference of date between the two types of staircase.

64 For stone and brick horizontal bonding courses see Ward-Perkins, J. B., ‘Notes on the structure and building methods of early Byzantine Architecture’ in Rice, D. Talbot, The Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors, Second Report (1958), 52–104Google Scholar. Stone bonding courses are to be seen on the walls of Antioch.

65 In Greek fortifications, towers were not bonded into the curtain for a similar reason, see Winter, F. E., Greek Fortifications (1971), 158 n. 31Google Scholar.

66 Deep rock-cut ditches were a feature of late Roman fortifications in Mesopotamia; see the description of Kale Hetmi Tay, possibly the Rhabdios described by Procopius (2. 1. 1–13), in Taylor, J. G., ‘Travels in Kurdistan with notices of the sources of the eastern and western Tigris, and ancient ruins in their neighbourhood’, Journ. Royal Geog. Soc. 35 (1865), 21–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 52; and Rabbat Kalesi in Taylor, op. cit. (n. 16 above), 360–1, and Wiessner, G., Nord-mesopotamische Ruinenstätten (Studien zur spätant. u. frühchrist. Kunst, bd. 2) (1980), pls. 10–21Google Scholar.

67 Rough ashlar is also seen on the inner face of the north water gate, low down, in the spandrels of the arched conduits; this is distinct from both Types A and B. A detailed survey would no doubt reveal further variation in masonry styles.

68 As noted above, Procopius states that the walls were sixty feet high in 540 (Wars 2. 13. 16), from which we are obliged to assume that their original height was thirty feet. In practice, however, the curtain is unlikely to have been a constant height overall, given the varied nature of the terrain. At Amida, Gabriel (op. cit. (n. 23), 96–113) records that the curtain varied from 8–12 m.

69 The Bell photographs are published and discussed by Crow, op. cit. (n. 11 above), 17–18, figs. 11, 12; an earlier description of the south water gate is found in Kinneir, W., Journey through Asia Minor, Armenia and Koordistan (1818), 440–1Google Scholar.

70 Karnapp, op. cit. (n. 10 above); also at Hisarkaya, (Wiessner, op. cit. (n. 66), pl. 5) and at Antioch (Rey, op. cit. (n. 63), 192, figs. 50, 51).

71 Chron. (MGH. AA. XI, 100) with Croke, op. cit. (n. 45).

72 Since the city was already provided with cisterns (Zach. Mit., HE 7. 6), those built between the walls were probably to provide a water supply for cattle penned there in time of siege (cf. Proc., Wars 2. 13. 18). At Beroea (Aleppo) in 540, cattle exhausted the water supply in the citadel and the citizens were forced to surrender (Proc., Wars 2. 7).

73 Joshua the Stylite (52) reports that the conduits at Edessa were similarly guarded with iron grilles and this was normal practice. At Dara holes to receive the iron bars are seen at both the north and south water gates (see pl. XII, 2).

74 At this point in his description Procopius does not explain how the reservoirs were filled (cf. n. 82 below). The largest surviving cistern is placed on the slopes of the north-west hill (see fig. 2 and Mango, op. cit. (n. 11), pl. 37). Tavernier, J. B. (Les six voyages I (1712), 233Google Scholar) noted seven or eight ruined churches. He saw two great cisterns to the north of the north church and a crypt, perhaps a cistern, beneath.

75 Procopius also wrongly attributes to Justinian the waterworks of Edessa (2. 7. 2–10, cf. Wilkinson, J., Egeria's Travels (1971), 284–7)Google Scholar and Antioch (2. 10. 15–18, but see Downey, op. cit. (n. 12), 371 ff.). In an early photograph of the Iron Gates at Antioch at least three structural phases are apparent: Dussaud, R., Deschamps, P. and Seyrig, H., La Syrie antique et médiévale, illustrée (1931)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

76 Resaina has great springs, one of the principal sources of the Habur. The chasm which Procopius describes is most probably a natural swallow-hole, so some underground water system connecting Dara and Resaina is possible, although it is most unlikely that large objects were washed down it only to resurface later elsewhere. Unfortunately, Crow was unable to investigate the water system in any detail.

77 Stein, op. cit. (n. 6), 717.

78 The de situ terrae sanctae is dated to the reign of Anastasius because the latest constructions mentioned in the work are Anastasian (cf. Heisenberg, A.Grabeskirche und Apostelkirche 1 (1908), 106–10)Google Scholar.

79 See n. 73 above.

80 From fig. 2, the plan of C. Preusser, fig. 12, the distance from the inner wall to the mouth of the gorge is at least 50 m. Even though the outer wall appears to swing out as it reaches the north water gate, Procopius has underestimated this distance.

81 In his first attempt to describe the water supply Procopius says that it came direct from the river (2. 2. 3–6). Since the surviving cisterns are located on high ground, this would have been impossible without sophisticated hydraulic equipment. He later corrects this statement (2. 3. 24), but still attributes the work to Justinian.

82 Hist. Arm. 3. 59 (Langlois II, 166–7), cf. F. H. Weissbach, RE 5A (1934), 1924–6 s.v. ‘Theodosiopolis, 2’. For the surviving pentagonal towers at Theodosiopolis, see Unal, R. H., Les monuments islamiques anciens de la l'ille d'Erzerum et de sa région (Bibl. arch. et hist. de l'Inst. français d'Archéol. d'Istanbul 22) (1968), 16, fig. 3Google Scholar.

83 Liebeschuetz, op. cit. (n. 28).

84 We should like especially to thank Averil Cameron for bringing us together for this project and for her subsequent advice, as well as the Leverhulme Trust for making possible Crow's visit to Dara.