Although Roman and Persian engagement with late antique Armenia has been analysed from several perspectives, its juridical dimension has been largely ignored. This chapter provides a reassessment of the legislation pertaining to Roman Armenia from the reign of Justinian, arguing that it offers a reflection of legal practices operating beyond the newly reorganised Roman provinces, in districts of Armenia under Persian hegemony. It may also attest the seeping of Roman legal culture beyond the formal limits of the jurisdiction. Crucially, the local inheritance practices which the legislation prescribes find analogues in Sasanian jurisprudence. Although not every aspect of Persian legal culture will have been replicated in the districts of Armenia or received in the same way, the rich Armenian literary tradition from late antiquity reveals a proximate legal culture, expressed in terms of concepts employed and processes followed. Three illustrations from Łazar P‘arpets‘i History are examined. Furthermore two later compilations preserve valuable evidence of law in practice. The tenth-century compilation titled History of Ałuank’ contains a collection of documents deriving from the Council of Partav convened in 705 ce. One of these confirms that land across Caucasian Albania was still being bought and sold at this time, that there was current uncertainty over whether the transfer of a village included the village church and its endowment, and that laymen had been represented as holding clerical status to circumvent this. A specific case is then outlined. The late thirteenth-century History of Siwnik’ on the other hand contains transcripts of fifty-two documents, and summaries of twelve more, recording property transactions in favour of the bishops of Siwnik’ and the see of Tat‘ev. It is argued that the earliest of these, dating from the middle of the ninth century, preserve clear vestiges of Sasanian legal culture. Armenian sources have much to tell us about law and legal tradition in Sasanian Persia.

Armenia was wholly partitioned between the ‘great powers’ of Rome and Persia throughout late antiquity. Although the manner and the degree of intrusion on the part of the two imperial powers may have fluctuated over the course of the two centuries following the eclipse of the Arsacid kingdom in 428 ce, every district of Armenia was under the hegemony of one or the other.

There has been much scholarly interest in the relationship between Rome and Persia in the Sasanian era. Historians have devoted detailed studies to the intensified political and military contacts following Ardashir I's accession to the throne of Iran. Most art historians and archaeologists, by contrast, have argued that cultural contacts between Rome and Sasanian Persia were only established under Shapur I. There is, however, architectural and artistic evidence to suggest that such contacts commenced, in fact, during the reign of Ardashir I. As far as architecture is concerned, Dietrich Huff has made a persuasive case, as we shall see later,1 that architects and masons from the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire were involved in the construction of the fire temple in the city of Ardashir Khurrah (Firuzabad).

This chapter argues that rock reliefs also imply similar cultural influence, even though the case is more difficult to prove. I examine the chronology of the five rock reliefs accomplished under Ardashir, as well as the workshops involved in producing them. The earliest relief, at Firuzabad I, shows traits characteristic of Elymaean craftsmen. Subsequently, new techniques and styles appear, and the relief at Naqsh-e Rostam I seems to imitate Persepolitan sculpture. Since numismatic evidence suggests that the reliefs were all carved within about ten years, only the involvement of experienced sculptors, perhaps from the Syro-Mesopotamian regions invaded by Ardashir, can explain such a major and rapid change of style.

One of the central topics of this volume is the relationnship between Rome and Persia in the Sasanian period. This is a subject which has attracted the attention of many scholars, particularly historians but also art historians and archaeologists. Historians have investigated in detail the long series of political and military contacts which started immediately after the accession to the throne of Iran of Ardashir I, the local ruler of Fars who had succeeded in taking power from the last of the Arsacid kings.

Gauging the importance of religion to the exercise of political will in the Sasanian world requires enormous care. It is all too easy to take the Great Kings at their word as they championed the doctrines of Zoroastrianism in their political pronouncements, especially as some of them also persecuted Christianity. Whether or not such sentiments were genuine, a closer analysis of the evidence suggests a more pragmatic royal use of religion. The political realities on the ground were more often the deciding factor in how the kings related to the religious sectors of Sasanian society. This state of affairs sometimes set the kings against the Zoroastrian clerics, whose agendas were not always in alignment, and it explains why Christian persecutions were usually motivated more by politics than doctrine. Moreover, this dynamic also explains the prominence of the Christian church in the later Sasanian period as kings employed it as a base of support, much as they had the Zoroastrian hierarchy.

INTRODUCTION

The complexities of religious life in the Sasanian realm, especially at the levels of the political elite, are staggering. No less so are the varied scholarly interpretations of how religion functioned in the state, especially religion's influence on the foreign and domestic policies of the shahanshahs, which is the primary concern of the present chapter. One basic fact has long been accepted: although Zoroastrianism was prominent in the Sasanian Empire, it was in fact a vast and diverse empire of many traditions existing in a coherent, if not always harmonious, system. The fortunes of these traditions, including Christianity, Judaism, Manichaeism, Buddhism and so on, fluctuated with the temperaments and policies of each shahanshah and, to a lesser extent, other entities such as powerful Zoroastrian mobads. Less universally but still commonly argued is another proposition: while religion ostensibly explains the policies of the kings, who usually claim to uphold some sort of Zoroastrian principle, such as orderliness and truth (asha), the actual motivations are more often than not informed by the political realities on the ground.

From a Roman perspective the Arabian Peninsula was frequently relegated to a peripheral position on the edge of the empire. In contrast, in different stages of Sasanian history the Arabian frontier acted as a keystone of their empire. Sasanian control, both direct and indirect, of the Arabian Peninsula strengthened its economic prosperity and military security. It was for these reasons that the empire's activities on their southern frontier in Arabia peaked during three distinct periods: during the early Sasanian period, principally in the reigns of Ardashir I and Shapur I; during the reign of Shapur II; and, perhaps most importantly, during the sixth century in renewed hostilities with the Roman Empire.

As Warwick Ball, Dan Lawrence, Tony Wilkinson and Kristen Hopper have analysed the nature and importance of the Sasanian Empire's northern, western and eastern frontiers elsewhere in this volume, it is now time to turn our attention to the empire's southern frontier in Arabia. From a western, Roman-centric perspective the Arabian Peninsula has often been regarded as an insignificant periphery of the ancient world; however, for the Persians it was arguably of much more central importance. The geopolitical position the Sasanians found themselves in after overthrowing the Parthians in 224 necessitated close relations with Arab tribes and a degree of authority over the Arabian Peninsula.1 Indeed, from the foundation of the Sasanian Empire Arabia played a significant role in its security and economic prosperity. As such, it will be argued here that the southern frontier in Arabia was a keystone of the Sasanian Empire at various points throughout its history. In understanding the important role the southern frontier fulfilled this chapter will have two main areas of focus. First, it will be necessary to show at what points in Sasanian history it acted as a keystone of empire. Secondly, an attempt will be made to show why Arabia was important and what strategies the shahs employed to ensure their control of the region.

It is important to stress that Sasanian activity and involvement in Arabia fluctuated over time in response to developments on the southern frontier itself and also to events elsewhere in the empire. Fortunately, there is both literary and archaeological evidence which allows us to trace the development of Sasanian activity on the southern frontier.

Using examples from several different regions of the Sasanian Empire, this chapter will look at the archaeological evidence for connectivity in frontier zones. Though a number of geographically diverse cases will be considered, I will focus on the evidence for local, regional and interregional networks in the Gorgan Plain of north-east Iran. We currently know very little about Sasanian-period routes through this landscape. Itineraries exist from antique- through Islamic-period textual sources, but the routes that they describe are often difficult to identify in the archaeological record. European travellers of the nineteenth century provide more detailed accounts, but the routes they describe reflect the political and economic landscape of a much later period. However, this information, combined with archaeological evidence for both earlier- and later-period routes, can be compared to archaeological settlement data for the Sasanian period to suggest potential pathways of movement. This approach will highlight how cultural, political and economic networks in this region (including both routes and boundaries) have changed through time.

FRONTIERS AND CONNECTIVITY

Frontiers are often drawn as simplistic linear borders, which fail to represent their dynamic nature. In reality they are comprised of multiple, and often overlapping, military, cultural or economic boundaries that can range along a continuum between physical barriers and conceptual boundaries; this makes them important zones of cultural contact where identities and political and social affiliations are formed and reformed at different scales and through time. Recent work on the northern and western frontiers of the Sasanian Empire has deepened our understanding of military boundaries in these borderlands, where the Sasanian Empire appears to have excelled at utilising and augmenting natural features, or constructing elaborate defensive systems to limit or constrain movement. However, these military frontiers often represent only one element within a complex frontier zone. In order to develop a more nuanced understanding of an empire's interactions with communities within and beyond its frontiers, we also need to explore evidence (or lack therefore) for the cultural and economic boundaries that existed alongside these military barriers, as well as evidence for the changing nature of these frontiers through time.