On This Day In Roman History, February 16
Imperator Caesar Nerva Traianus Divi Nervae filius Augustus, known today simply as Trajan, sends a laurelled letter to the Senate declaring the Parthian campaign completed on February 16, 116 CE. Classical historians, such as Dio, considered the campaign to be brought about due to the lust for prestige in the form of territorial annexation. Modern historians consider the motivation to be derived from financial and political issues. Parthia had placed a King in power of Armenia that was considered unacceptable by Rome. Parthia also controlled important Indian trade routes as well as very profitable small scale Semitic city-to-city trade. Trajan looked to turn all three of these elements into a more favorable situation for the Romans. Trajan's health would later begin to falter during the sieging of the city of Hatra, where he may have contracted heat stroke. Trajan would sail back to Italy due to his illness and die in 117 inside the city of Selinus, which would later be named Trajanopolis to honor his passing.
Did you know?
During Trajan's conquest of Dacia, Syrian auxiliary units would be used with much success. One of the more interesting units was a cavalry camel unit from Palmyrene support. This campaign against Dacia was Trajan's first steps into de-stabilizing Semitic trade and putting it under the Roman yoke through the hopeful annexation of Charax. M. I. Finley (a modern historian on ancient economies) controversially argue that this campaign was a "badly miscalculated and expensive assault on Parthia" which led to an example of one of many Roman "commercial wars".
Pictured: Aureus issued by Trajan to celebrate the conquest of Parthia. The coin depicts Trajan adorned with a laureate and the reverse two mourning Parthians with their heads down below the trophy of Roman conquest. Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. http://www.cngcoins.com, via Wikimedia Commons.
Opinion
Welcome to my daily opinion. While many sources disagree about the causes of the Parthian Campaign, I chose to believe it happened for reasons meeting somewhere in the middle. The Roman Empire was huge, and I mean huge even before the Parthian conquests. The spoils of war seemed obvious, as did the motivation to collapse near-eastern trade monopolies. However, foreign wars against enemies who are very equipped and knowledgeable of the surrounding harsh terrain and environment are expensive. Do we not often see large, rich states and nations spending way too much to do way too little in foreign occupation and conquest? Trajan was the victor of this campaign, and Rome was at its largest territorial expanse. But at what cost? I do think the trade control and territorial control Rome was rewarded came close to making it worth the entire campaign. Close, but no cigar.
Sources
Luttwak, E. N. (1994). The grand strategy of the Roman Empire: from the first century A.D. to the third. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
Mattern, S. P. (2002). Rome and the enemy imperial strategy in the principate. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Sidebotham, S. E. (1986). Roman economic policy in the Erythra Thalassa 30 B.C. - A.D. 217. Leiden: Brill.
Further Reading:
Special Thanks: Michael Houghan
No comments:
Post a Comment