Constantin Zuckerman. Heraclius in 625. Revue des études byzantines, tome 60, 2002. pp. 189-197

8/3/2019 Constantin Zuckerman. Heraclius in 625. Revue des tudes byzantines, tome 60, 2002. pp. 189-197.

1/10


2/10

HERACLIUS IN 6 2 5

Constantine Zuckerman

Rsum: L'itinraired'Hracliuset la chronologiede sesbataillesdurantdeuxannesclef de la campagneperse, 625-626,subissent ici une rvision, le tmoignagedeThophanetantrevu la lumirede celuide Pseudo-Sbos.Uneannede campagne,placepar Thophanesub a.m.6115,se rduitdsormais deuxmoisd'hostilitsdurantl'hiver625,et les vnementsdcritssuba.m.61 16se placent dansles moisquisuivent.Cetteanalysetenantcomptetant des ralitsdu terrainquedes donnes dessourceslimine les contradictionsdurcitdeThophanequiontjusqu'icidfiles commentateurs.

Theophanes, our main source for the last phase of Heraclius' epicstruggleagainst the Shah Khusro II, is notoriouslyweak on chronology.

His chronological errors often stem from the necessityto "cut and paste"his data, derivedfrom a variety of sources,into yearly entries arrangedby anni mundi. An error of this kind is at the origin of a confusedsequence of eventsat a crucial stageof Heraclius' Persian campaign.

The eventsdescribed by Theophanes in the entries for the a.m. 6114-6118 = a.d. 621/2-625/6 actually took place between 624 and 628. Thischronological framework, defined by Heraclius' departure fromConstantinople on 25 March 624 and Khusro II's death on 29 February628, has been established by Ernst Gerland and later defended byAndreas Stratosand by James Ho ward-Johnston.1Despite an occasionaldissent, it does not need to be argued here anew.2The distributionof the

material between the yearly entries is problematic, however. CyrilMango summarizes part of the problemin a note to the entry for a.m.6116=623/4 which he believes to describe the events of 626:

1. E. Gerland,DiepersischenFeldzgedes Kaisers Herakleios,BZ3, 1894,p. 330-373, on p. 332-337; A. N. Stratos, Byzantiumin the SeventhCentury,1 : 602-634,Amsterdam1968, p. 151-153,363-365;J. Howard-Johnston,Heraclius'PersianCampaignsandthe Revivalof the EastRomanEmpire,622-630,War in History6, 1999,p. 1-44,seep. 16.

2. See,recently,P. Speck,piphaniaet Martinesur les monnaiesd'Hraclius,Revuenumismatique152,1997,p. 457-465,on p. 459-461,andC. Zuckerman,Au sujetde lapetiteaugustasurlesmonnaiesd'Hraclius,ibid.,p. 473-478,on p.476-477.

Revue des tudes Byzantines60,2002,p. 189-197.


3/10

190 CONSTANTINEZUCKERM AN

"Theophanes started the offensiveagainst Persia one year too early [in623] and so had extra time to fill".3Similar problems beset the previousentry for a.m. 6115=622/3, i.e. 625. They make Stratosaffirm that "it isextremelydifficult either to place or time the operations which tookplace in 625", the evidence "leaving manyblanks, which we cannot s u pplement with the presentstateof the sources."4

The problemsof the two successive entries are related and, as weargue in this study, find a common solution. The military activity that theentries describe does not spreadover two years,as statedby Theophanesand the commentatorswho follow him, but over four or five months.Theophanes did not understandthat most of the fighting took place d u ring the winter, early in 625, and so he allocated to it a regularcampaignseason, starting in the spring and ending in a winter pause (a.m. 6115).Consequently, he moved the eventsof the spring 625 to the next yearlyentry (a.m.6116).

Theophanes' editorialerror can be demonstrated on two levels. TheArmenian chronicle of Pseudo-Sebeos describes the same eventsin moredetail and in the right order, while stating explicitly that the fightingwent on through the winter. We will presentthis data graphically,withhelp of a map, in order to show its coherence. But it can also be shownthat Theophanes' entry for a.m. 6115 is all but coherent andcontainsaclear indicationthat the hostilitiestook place in winter, despite the initialstatement that they only started in spring. Retaining the version ofPseudo-Sebeos removes a major hurdle in reconstructingthe Heraclianchronology.The value of our source material for the years 624-626 isthus vindicated,as it allows us to follow Heraclius' movements continuous ly lmostmonth by month.

** *

In the summer and the fall of 624, the emperor Heraclius profitedfrom a massive engagement of the Persian army in Asia Minor in orderto carry out a daring raid in the Persian rear, wreaking havoc in Mediaand threateningfrom afar the capital, Ctesiphon. According to Pseudo-Sebeos,5 Khusro II then urgently recalled the general Shahr Varaz fromAsia Minor.Once Heraclius learnedof the arrivalof the Persian army toNisibis, he stoppedhis offensiveand retreated with booty andcaptives toCaucasian Albania (Aiuank'). A seventh-centurysource, the Eulogy of

3. C. Mangoand R. Scott, TheChronicleof TheophanesConfessor.ByzantineandNearEasternHistoryAD284-813,Oxford1997,p.446.

4. Stratos(citedn. 1),p. 159.5. All quotationsfrom Pseudo-Sebeosin this paperare from The ArmenianHistory

attributed to Sebeos,translatedby R. W. Thomsonwitha historicalcommentaryby J.Howard-Johnston, Liverpool1999,p. 81-83(=p. 125-126of G. V. Abgaryan'scriticaledition,Erevan1979).


4/10

HERACLIUS IN625 191

the Albanian prince Juanser (670), used by the late-tenth-centuryAlbanian historian Movss Dasxuranc'i, providesthe important indicat ion hat Heraclius first set his wintercamp in the village of Kalankatuk'

and then moved it to the village of Diwtakan.6 According to Pseudo-Sebeos, Khusro II "was informedthat Heraclius (...) was intendingtopass into Iberia via Aluank'".

Our map shows that Heraclius was indeed well positioned, inKalankatuk', for an eventual retreat, through the valleyof the Kur, toIberia wherehe had allies. But Pseudo-Sebeos further claims that ShahrVaraz wasted no time : "He rapidly came to Ayrarat, crossed intoGardman to oppose , and camped oppositehim at the otherTigranakert. Shahn with 30,000 troops arrived and camped behindHeraclius in the town of Tigranakert.So the latter werecamped on thisside, and the former on that side; and the camp of Heraclius wasbetween the two." The commonly proposed localization of Tigranakertsouth of Partaw and of the "other Tigranakert"north of Gardman,asindicated on our map, shows how dangerousHeraclius' position s u ddenly became.7 Exposed to a pincer movementof the two Persianarmies,he could no longerretreat to Iberia for fear of being attackedbyShahr Varaz from the flank.

Pseudo-Sebeos errs in indicatingthat the second Persian army wascommanded by Shahn. The source of Movss Dasxuranc'i identifiesthecommander of the "New Army" that besieged Heraclius in Albania asShahraplakan. The same name, Sarablangas, is givenby Theophanes tothe generalwho was expected to attackHeraclius in Albania in conjuncti o n ith Shahr Varaz. Theophanes reports, moreover, that Shahnbrought another, third army from Persia at a later stagein the campaign,and this explains the error of Pseudo-Sebeos (who ignoresShahraplakanentirely).8 This omission notwithstanding,Pseudo-Sebeos providesavery coherentview of the further events.

Surroundedby the Persian troops from east and west, precluded fromadvancing to the north as it was his intention, Heraclius surprised thePersians again. According to Pseudo-Sebeos, "he turned against thearmy in his rear (that of Shahn). He struck promptly with force, androuted them. He marched through Tslukk', and escaped through the

6. MovssDasxurani,TheHistory of the CaucasianAlbanians,II, 10, tr. C.J.F.Dowsett,Oxford1961,p. 80-81(=p. 132-133of thecriticaleditionby V. Arak'elyan:MovssKalankatuac'i,Patmut'iwnAiuanic'asharhi,Erevan1983).On Movss'seventh-century sources, see C. Zuckerman,Byzantium andthe Khazars- The FirstEncounter,to appearin theProceedingsof the InternationalColloquiumon the Khazars,Jerusalem2002(Russiantranslation: Hazarijai Vizantijapervyekontakty,Materialypoarheologii,istoriii etnografiiTavrii8, Simferopol2001,p. 312-333).

7. For this admittedlyhypotheticallocalization,see mostrecently R.H. Hewsen,Armenia: AHistorical Atlas,Chicago2001,map52.

8. AllquotationsfromTheophanesare in Mango'stranslation(supra,n. 3),p. 438-447(=p. 306-314of the criticaledition of C. De Boor:Theophanes,Chronographia,I,Leipzig1883).


5/10

192 CONST ANTINEZUCKERMAN

mountainousterrain to the plain of Nakhchawan in the winter time". Theindicationthat all this maneuvering andfighting tookplace in the winteris essential.As to the directionof Heraclius' escape through Ciukk'whichis a district of Siwnik'-Siunia it is confirmedby the source ofMovss Dasxuranc'i which indicates that the Persian armies chasedHeraclius through the country ofSiwnik'.Theophanes claimsthat Heraclius only set out from Albania at thebeginningof spring.He admitsthat Heraclius was threatenedat the timeby two Persian armies, of Shahr Varaz and of Sarablangas(Shahraplakan), yet presents hismove as the beginningof a new attackagainst Persia.Thus it is clear that Heraclius moved south and that thesituationdescribed,with less geographical details,by Theophanes is thesame as in Pseudo-Sebeos.eraclius' march south started, according to Theophanes, by a"lengthy detour" through "level plains that providedan abundance offood". This descriptionmust refer to the road along the valley of the Trtuand the southern edge of the Lake Sevan (Gelakuni), which then turnssouth to Salat and Naxcawan. By way of contrast, Shahraplakan pushedahead through difficult country in order to overtakeHeraclius, and thetroops of Shahr Varaz were doing the same. The Persian generals, leftbehind by Heraclius' daring move, had to preventhis escape at all priceand, mostimportantly, stop him from invading Persia again. This fear, aswell as Heraclius' superior tactical skill, explain why Shahraplakanaccepted battle on a difficult ground andwas utterly defeated.Shahn,who arrived with a fresh army from Persia just after this defeat, confronted Heraclius in his turn and suffered bad losses. He could then joinforces with the troops of Shahr Varaz that were pursuing Heraclius,while the latter "pushed on to the land of the Huns". Obviously,Heraclius was still movingsouth and, therefore, his Laz and Abasgianallies, who objectedfrom the start to a new raid againstPersia, a b a ndoned him at that point(takingno doubt the northwestern routealong theAraxes, see the map). After the allies had left, Heraclius managed tobreak away from the Persians,who were pursuinghim the whole time ;then "the emperorcrossed over and wentby the regionsof Persarmenia."

Theophanes' descriptionof Heraclius' flight joins at this point that ofPseudo-Sebeos. The latter indicates that Heraclius, pursuedby "ShahrVaraz with his armyand Shahn with his survivors(...), crossed the fordof the Araxes river at the town ofVrnjunik'." Thus he could detach himself from the Persiansand reach the country of Bagrewand (Theophanes'Persarmenia). ThatTheophanes and Pseudo-Sebeos describe one and thesame itinerary has been observed by Hakop Manandjan who pertinentlycorrectedTheophanes' "land of the Huns" ()in the "landof Siwnik'" (),actually traversedby Heraclius after he hadleft Albania and beforehe crossed the Araxes nearNaxcawan.9 None of

9. Ja. A. Manandjan,Marsrutypersidskihpohodovimperatora Iraklija,W 3, 1950,p.133-153,onp. 141.


6/10

HERACLIUS IN625 193

the scholars who maintainthe reading"Huns" can localize their land in away compatible with Heraclius' attesteditinerary.10

After having mentioned the "crossing" and Heraclius' passage to

Persarmenia, Theophanes provides a mostunexpected detail.It turns outthat it is alreadywinter ( ) and that the Armeniansoldiers of Shahr Varaz are "dispersed in their own lands so as to takerest in their houses". Therefore,Heraclius decides to attack Shahr Varazin his wintercamp,capturesit togetherwith the general's wives and treasures, and destroys manyPersian soldiers.The next annual entry, a.m.6116=623/4, starts with Heraclius' deliberationon March 1st, at theplace of his victory, as to the road to take. This descriptionis patentlydisturbed.Theophanes situatesHeraclius' departurefrom Albania in thespring and makes it clear that until the emperor crossed intoPersarmenia, he was hotly pursued by the Persian troops.This close p u rsuit could not last long. In fact, the Laz and the Abasgian allies, whodecide to leave Heraclius at the start of his march, actuallydesert himwhen the pursuit is nearly over. Thus, in Theophanes' own logic,eraclius' should have reached Persarmenia by the late spring. And yetthe next scene takes place in the middle of the winter. Hence Stratos'complaint of the evidence "leaving many blanks" (supra), the blankc o rresponding to the major part of the year 625.

There are good reasons to reject Theophanes' construction.The townof Arcs where, according to Pseudo-Sebeos, ShahrVaraz had set hiswinter camp that was capturedby Heraclius is localized on the northeastern shore of the Lake Van. Coherentgeographical indications p rovided by Pseudo-Sebeos map Heraclius' itinerary from the crossingofthe Araxes south of Naxcawan to the Lake Van.Arcs is only 300 km tothe west, as the crow flies, from Heraclius' camp in Diwtakan, anunlikelyshort net distance for Heraclius to cover in a year of continuousmaneuvering.It is even less probable that two entirely independentsources,Theophanes and Pseudo-Sebeos, would have a "blank" in thevery same portion of Heraclius' itinerary. Both bring Heraclius fromAlbania to the crossingof the Araxes (although the river is not named inTheophanes), both sent himthen to Persarmenia to confrontShahr Varaz.While Theophanes does not add a single valid geographical indication tothe itinerary of Pseudo-Sebeos, his chronologyleaves Heraclius with somuch time on his hands that Ho ward-Johnston sendsHeraclius north,

10.I. S. CiCurov,kavkazskompohodeimperatoraIraklija,in Vostocnaja Evropadrevnosti i srednevekov'e,Moscow1978,p. 261-266, dissociatesthe descriptionsofTheophanesand of Pseudo-Sebeos(relatingthemto distinctepisodesof Heraclius'campaign)and identifiesthe landof Hunsas thecountryof the WesternTurksin theNorthernCaucasus; S. G. Kljastornyj,"Narod Asparuha",gunny Kavkazai drevnetjurkskijOlimp,in Drevnejsiegosudarstva VosiocnojEvropy1998,Moscow2000,p. 120-125,localizesthe Hunsin Daghestan.Both localizationsleaveopenthe questionhow couldHeracliusforce hisway back to Transcaucasiaafter havingmovedhis army to theNorthernCaucasus.


7/10

194 CONSTANTINE ZUCKERMAN

suggestingthat he "crossed some ruggedcountry to come within strikingdistance of the Black Sea coastlands, marched south acrossSiunia to the middle Araxes valley (past Naxcawan once again)," etc.11However, Heraclius' itinerary in Pseudo-Sebeos is coherent andclear,and there is nothing in Theophanes to make us modify it. What is more,a year of maneuvering andfighting in Persarmenia by two major armieswould have left the country destroyed,a fact that Pseudo-Sebeos wouldbe unlikelyto omit.

Our map shows Heraclius' itinerary from Kaiankatuk' and Diwtakanto Arcs according to the geographical indications of Pseudo-Sebeos(and of Theophanes when available) ; it follows the layout of theArmenian roads as reconstructedby S. T. Eremyan.12The whole itinera r y xtends over about 600 km and suggests a rather tight schedule.After his speedy retreat from Persia, Heraclius must have reachedAlbania by the late November. But his winter rest was short since thePersians did not rest either. He was soon surrounded by a detachmentofShahr Varaz's troops the Persian general could hardly bring to themountainsof Albania his whole army and by Shahraplakan's soldiers.It would havebeen utterly implausible to expect the Persian generals as modern scholars do to stay and wait, onlya few miles from theirpray, through the rude winter months, despite their superiority in numbers. Therefore,Heraclius had to find an escape very soon, no later thanthe end of December. And that he brilliantlydid, presentinghis flight asa new attackon Persia despite the fact that it started by a "long detour".The attempts of the Persian generals to stop him in the mountainsofSiwnik' brought upon them heavy losses and Heraclius would have

probably continuedsouth, if he had not been abandoned by hisCaucasian allies. Weakened by their desertion,he did not dare to take theremaining troops farther south, deep into the enemy territory, andchanged the direction abruptly. His rapid march north-east, toBagrewand, must have convinced Shahr Varaz that Heraclius seeks toescape to his own land, but Heraclius' sharp turnaroundproved himwrong.The attack on Arcs, whichcaught the Persians off their guard,took place late in February625.

The eventsfrom the March 1st on are rather coherentlydescribed byTheophanes (a. m. 6116). Heraclius marches west,confrontsShahr Varazin several battlesand inflicts more losses on the Persians, whichprovoke

their retreat. Later Heraclius takes his winter quarters in the region ofSebasteia. The versionof Pseudo-Sebeos is shorter but in no waycontradictory. After the destruction of his camp, Shahr Varaz continued toharass Heraclius for a while, "butbecause his army was weary, he

1 1. Howard-Johnston(citedn. 1),p. 18.12.We use a map by S. T. Eremjan,Armenijai sopredel'nyestrany 701-862gg.

insertedin IovannesDrashanakertci,IstorijaArmenii,trans.M.O. Darbinjan-Melikjan,Erevan 1986. Hisreconstructionof the ancientroadsdiffersslightlyfrom the one proposed by Manandjan(citedn. 9).


8/10

HERACLIUS IN 625 195

decided to interpose [between them] many provincesso that his armycould rest and reequip".

Scholars who accept Theophanes' scheme of the campaign seasonsface an inextricablechronological problem.Those who date, correctly,the beginningof the campaign (a.m. 6114) in 624 are then obliged toplace the eventsdescribed sub a. m. 6116 in 626, which isthe year of theAvar siege of Constantinople. But there is no way to fit all the eventspresented suba. m. 6116 before the siege that took place in the summerand that is duly described by Theophanes in the next yearly entry (a. m.6117). Hence the claim that Theophanes creates,in these entries, "suchcontradictionsas at times to be incomprehensible" (Stratos) and that"frightful muddles ensue when Theophanes reaches the year 626"(Howard-Johnston). The historicalreconstructionbased on this assumptio n adicallyrevises Theophanes' narrative: it involves eliminatingthesummer, the fall and the winter that separateHeraclius' victoriesoverShahr Varaz from the siege of Constantinople and compacting the latterevents in one year, 626. 13 This reconstructionhas the drawback ofdestroyinga coherentnarrativewhich describes the separationof forcesafter Heraclius' victories,the emperor's winter quartersin Sebasteia, theraisingof a new Persian army and the new invasion by Shahn, etc. Thisradical amputationis not supportedby any parallel source. Placing thebeginningof the campaign in 623 as arguedby Norman H. Baynes,14allows to recover the missingyear but ultimately creates even worsecontradictions.

Our solution,as argued above, has the supportof Pseudo-Sebeos andremoves an inner contradictionin Theophanes' narrative. It basicallyconsists in eliminatingthe winter pauses whichopen and close the entryfor a. in. 6115. Thus the eventsdescribed in this entry pull together theprevious and the followingentry and take not a year but merely twomonths,January-February625. 15 The entry for a. m. 6116 describes therest of the fighting in 625 that ends in the late spring or the early summerby a voluntaryseparationof forces,both sidesbeing exhausted by c ampaigning through the winter.

Heraclius clearlyprofited from the long pause in fighting for raisingand training more troops: according to Theophanes (a. m. 6117), hecould divide his people early in 626 in three functionalarmies.Atthis point, there is again a major confusionin Theophanes. He claimsthat Heraclius moved to Lazica with the army that he commanded in per-

13.Stratos(citedn. 1),p. 165; Howard-Johnston(citedn. 1),p. 11.14.N. H. Baynes,Thedateof the Avarsurprise,BZ21,1912,p. 1 10-128,seep. 115,

cf. P. Speck,DasgeteilteDossier(POIKILA9),Bonn1988,p. 129-13115. A very similarmistake separatingconsecutiveeventsby a winterpause

occursin Theophanes'narrative ofHeraclius'campaignof 622, the sourceof which,Georgeof Pisidia'sExpeditioPersica,is fortunatelypreserved,seeJ. Howard-Johnston,The OfficialHistoryof Heraclius'PersianCampaigns,in E. Dabrowaed., TheRomanandByzantineArmyin theEast,Cracovie1994,p. 57-87,on p. 60,n. 7.


9/10

196 CONSTANTINE ZUCKERMAN

son andjoined forces with his allies the Turks.Such move was, in fact,foreseenin 626. The Turks invaded Persia in anticipationof Heraclius'arrival,but the massive Persian invasion and the threat to Constantinoplepreventedthe emperorfrom joining them, and the Turks withdrew.Theallies could only meetand attackPersia together in 627. Such chronologic a l ix-ups are common in Theophanes. In a study that discusses thisepisode in detail, we show how Theophanes also displaces the Turks'subsequent departurefrom Heraclius' camp from March 628 to October627, thus distorting the pictureof the last assault on Persia.16

The revisedchronology ofthe years 625-626 sheds a new light onHeraclius' military genius. The traditional chronological schemeimposed a somewhat surrealisticview of Heraclius fleeing likea rabbitfrom the troopsof Shahr Varaz during the entire year 625. No wonderthat Stratosaffirmed, quotingKulakovskij, that "the results were meager" and that "Heraclios' successeswere far less than they seem in the tellingof Theophanes". 17Our analysis s rather different. Heraclius' victories over Shahraplakan, Shahnand Shahr Varaz, achieved in a quick succession, wore down the Persiantroops, established Heraclius in the control of the major part of AsiaMinor and granted him a welcome reprieve from fighting which hepromptly used for strengthening hisforces (thusbeing able to detach apart of them for the defenseof Constantinople in 626). He also used thistime to negotiatewith the Turks the joint invasion of Persia that eventual ly rought it to its knees.

Constantine ZuckermanCollge de France - UMR 7572

16.Zuckerman(citedn. 6). The numberand the natureof chronologicalerrorsinTheophanesshowthe troublehe had in extractingthis informationfromhis sourcesandmake it unlikelythat he had at his disposala neatlyarranged"officialhistory" oferaclius'campaigns,asarguedby Howard-Johnston(citedn. 15).

17.Stratos(citedn. 1),p. 164.


10/10

Documents

Constantin Zuckerman. Heraclius in 625. Revue des études byzantines, tome 60, 2002. pp. 189-197