* Ulf Scharrer To my daughter heloise sibylla, from whom i learn so much. Writing about a nomadic subject often causes a wide range of problems, which are to be found mainly in terminology and in the nature of the evidence. This also ap- plies to the subject of nomadic confederations in the near east under roman rule up to the reign of constantine. in this essay i am going to outline some of these problems, pose some questions and propose possible answers to these, which are by no means meant to be conclusive, but which are supposed to point to possible ields of future research. accordingly, i shall irst sketch briely the terminological range of the concepts of nomadism, ethnicity and the notion of tribe, and against this background i will try to provide a brief sketch of the problems of nomadism and ethnicity of nomadic peoples in the roman near east. The second main issue is the complex of relations between nomadic and sedentary peoples, which includes friendly and hostile relatations. especially the latter will lead to the debated ques- tion of a nomadic menace. against this background, the inal and longest section will be devoted to the problems of nomadic allies themselves. nomadism in modern scholarship The irst problem may at irst glance seem to be rather redundant: when we speak about nomads and nomadism, what do we actually mean by that? Generally speak- ing, terms belonging to the semantic ield of the word nomadism today are used in a greater variety of senses than might be expected: they are for example employed often rather metaphorically as it seems as names of systems of mobile and wire- less computing; 1 for mobile robots; 2 for the contemporary mobility on the labour- * i owe thanks to Ted Kaizer for the invitation to oxford and to the participants of the conference for a valuable discussion of my paper. i also wish to thank Ted for the careful editing of this paper. i alone am responsible for all shortcomings of this essay. 1 e.g. bender e.a. (2000); hsi (2003); Kwok and lau (2002); Kylnp e.a. (1996); mackowiak (2000); makimoto e.a. (2001); mcKnight e.a. (2004); ramachandran (2002), p. 621; sand- holm and huai (2000); sawhney and schmandt (2000). see also the subtitle of the contem- porary journal IEEE Personal Communications. The Magazine of Nomadic Communications and Computing. 2 e.g. Gvozdjak and li (1998). 242 Ulf scharrer market, be it physical 3 or psychical; 4 in physics for some kind of nuclear vortices; 5
in biological sciences the term sometimes is employed in generic names, e.g. Peri- clemenes nomadophilia for some sort of shrimps, Rhopilema nomadica for the mediterranean jellyish or Nomada Scopoli for a certain sort of bees, in addition as characterisation of certain spiders 6 or generally of polar bears; 7 furthermore for the mobility of royal courts; 8 for christians following the traces of God; 9 and inally in contemporary french philosophy and literary theory we ind the concept of no- madic singularities 10 and the idea of la nomadisation de la raison. 11 although these examples vary widely in their application of the term nomadism, they all have in common that the emphasis clearly is on the aspect of mobility. 12 however, in ethnographic contexts the deinitions and applications of the term nomadism vary to some extent. in this respect there seem to be nearly as many ideas of nomadism as there are works on the topic. 13 broadly speaking two main concepts can be distinguished: 14 the irst concept apparently follows the just men- tioned emphasis on mobility and deines nomadism as a special kind of economy which is marked, besides mobility, by a certain degree of social coherence and or- ganization and a close mutual relationship to the sedentary world. 15 since this no- tion does not necessarily imply a primarily pastoral economy, it also includes non- pastoral but mobile groups, 16 such as gypsies 17 and hunter and gatherer societies. 18 3 e.g. heute hier, morgen fort in Der Stern (24/2004), p. 17081, esp. p. 17980. see on rus- sian scientists outside russia: Janositz (1995). see also the somehow strange book of schlgel (2006), esp. p. 10815. 4 e.g. Welsch (1994), esp. p. 74850. 5 e.g. bishop (1994). 6 e.g. Kunz (2001). 7 rosing and frenz (1999). 8 e.g. briant 1988; leibetseder (2004), p. 127. 9 mironez diez (2001), esp. p. 252. 10 deleuze (1969), p. 12431, with Taureck (1988), p. 16871. The concept of deleuze is em- ployed e.g. by braidotti (1994) and roy (2003). see also reid (2003); schmitz (2002); Gh- aussy (1999); pels (1999) and braidotti (1999). 11 borreil (1993). see also the characterisation of m. foucault as nomadic mind by Kohler (1992), p. 157. 12 see also Guldin (2002), p. 378. 13 see Guldin (2002), p. 379; lyonnet (2004), p. 25; scharrer (2002b), p. 288; scharrer (2002c), p. 167; scholz 1995, p. 1925. 14 see orthmann (2002), p. 139. 15 see the programmatic title of rao (1987): The other Nomads. This notion is followed e.g. by streck (1992); streck (2002); leder (2002), p. 1113. see also Gertel (2002), p. 59; Knauf (1992), p. 634. on similarities see porter (2004), p. 69. 16 see the contributions in rao (1987); mieck (1982), p. 504. see also Knauf (1992), p. 636. 17 e.g. leder (2005), p. 19; marushiakova and popov (2002a); marushiakova and popov (2002b), esp. p. 356; sigona 2003. 18 e.g. Knauf (1992), p. 634; streck (1992). furthermore see along sega: die heutige regie- rung ist schlecht, sie zerstrt unser landand sarawak: Unruhe im nomadenland in Pro Re- genwald News-Letter 18, September 2002, p. 34. This notion is also employed in some hi- story school books, e.g. abelein e.a. (2004), p. 33; cornelissen e.a. (2004), p. 172; Tatsch and regenhardt (2004), p. 29. cf. Khazanov (1994), p. XXXViiiiX. 243 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east The second notion of nomadism is more narrow: it implies a mutual depen- dence between mobility and pastoralism. according to this concept nomadism may be distinguished from pastoralism by the mobility of ethnic groups or at least sub- groups, and by the fact that other pastoralists generally are settled. furthermore nomadism can be discerned from other forms of mobility by pastoralism as the main economic basis. 19 in this very sense mobility based on pastoralism the word nomad and related terms are, with only very few exceptions, widely used by ancient authors from hecataeus of miletus to ammianus marcellinus and beyond. 20
for two reasons in the present context i prefer to use the term in this narrow conno- tation rather than in the wider sense: irstly this apparently corresponds to the Greek and latin ethnographic terminology, and secondly the expanded concept of noma- dism seems to run the risk of becoming too vague and hence in consequence it is not really useful to deine nomadism as a very special form of economic and cultu- ral life. however, following the narrow notion of nomadism there are still a good number of problems remaining. With respect to the present topic two of these should be singled out, which are in any case matters of fundamental dispute within nomadic scholarship generally. first there is the question of which categories are useful to classify nomadic phenomena. scholarship has suggested different criteria of classiication, 21 above all the animals that are bred and the geographical zones and regions. as regards the irst criterium, with respect to the near east the main distinction often made is that between the herding of sheep and goat on the one hand and of camels on the other, implying two different degrees of nomadic life. Whereas nomadic camel-breeders could move into the desert, sheep- and goat- herding would only be possible in regions that provide suficiant water and graz- ing-grounds. 22 This leads to the second criterium, namely that a distinction has to be made according to the natural surroundings. often a distinction is made between nomadic groups living mainly in desert or steppe regions and those dwelling in more fertile territories. 23 Within this framework, the arabic term badw, bedouin, is applied to those nomadic groups whose main economic basis is the camel and who basically live in the desert or steppe. 24 19 e.g. bar-Yosef and Khazanov (1992b), p. 2; chatty (2002), p. 23; Knig (1981), p. 27; patai (1951), p. 401; paul (2003), p. 29; p. 33; scholz (1995), p. 2032; scharrer (2002b), p. 288 291, with further references. see marx (1992), p. 255. 20 on the ancient terminology see briant (1982), p. 129; Khazanov (1994), 16; scharrer (2002c), with further references. see also amm. marc. 31.2.179 on the Halani. see also scharrer (2002b), p. 289; scharrer (2004) p. 312; stark (2002), p. 364. 21 e.g. scholz (1995), p. 67. see orthmann (2002), p. 138; scharrer (2002b), p. 293. 22 bacon (1954), p. 446; donner (1999), p. 223; parker (1991), p. 500; paul (2003), p. 31; scholz (1995), p. 606; p. 834; p. 1035. see isaac (1998f), p. 412. see also brentjes (1986), p. 878. 23 e.g. Khazanov (1994), p. 4069. cf. macdonald (1991), p. 1023. against this view: orth- mann (2002), p. 138. 24 on the term badw / bedouin see e.g. bacon (1954), p. 44; dhont (2004), p. 14; Knauf (1992), p. 635; Kuhnen (1991), p. 326; Kupershoek (2001), p. 534; orthmann (2002), p. 140; 1489; 244 Ulf scharrer all this touches on the second problem singled out here. a widely discussed question in scholarship is whether nomads could be classiied according to their level of nomadism, i.e. whether it is possible to speak of pure nomadism or diffe- rent degrees of semi-nomadism. 25 included in this complex are the aspects of the relations between settled and non-settled populations, as well as nomadic strategies to get other goods than those being provided by their animals. 26 With respect to this, Khazanov argued that in reality pure nomads, in the sense that they are eco- nomically self-suficient, do not exist and never have existed: in addition to those goods they get from their animals they are in need of other commodities, which they can only get from interaction with the sedentary world. for this purpose, no- madic groups follow different strategies, namely seasonal agriculture of a whole ethnic group, full scale farming of a part of an ethnic group, trade, services in ex- change for goods, and inally, as an important economic strategy, the raiding of settled areas. 27 The close interaction and even symbiotic relationship between no- madic and settled populations is currently assumed in scholarship, 28 as is the de- pendence of nomadic groups on the sedentary world. 29 eThniciTY in modern scholarship i will now turn to the earlier mentioned term ethnic group. When the concept of ethnicity was developed in the nineteenth century, it denoted primarily a more or less static group with common characteristics, such as religion, the assumption of common descent, social hierarchy, common language, common identity etc. as such, the notion is still widely used today. 30 however, the most signiicant aspect of the concept that has changed is the idea that ethnic groups are not actually unchang- EIMW, p. 107 s.v. Bedouin (davis). cf. chatty (2002), p. 3; rets (2003), p. 23; sweet (1965), 11337; scharrer (2002b), p. 2934, with further references. 25 see Gertel e.a. (2002); hoyland (2001), p. 8990; isaac (1998f), p. 413; robinson (1996), p. 4312. see also the debate in the time of the french mandate in syria: lange (2002), esp. p. 157. 26 see scharrer (2004), p. 311. 27 Khazanov (1994), esp. p. XXXi; 3; 345; 6984; 198224, followed explicitly e.g. by dever (1992), p. 88; scholz (1995), p. 302; stark (2002), p. 3712; staubli (1991), p. 12. see fur- thermore donner (1999), p. 26; orthmann (2002), p. 16072; paul (2003), p. 356; rothstein (1899), 1267; scharrer (2002b), p. 292, with further references. 28 donner (1999), p. 246; dostal (1989), p. 3941; isaac (1998f), p. 4123; hoyland (2001), p. 8990; Khler-rollefson (1992), p. 11; marx (1992), p. 2567; offer (2003), p. 20; orth- mann (2002), p. 15697; paul (2003), p. 29; 33; robinson (1996), p. 435; stark (2002), p. 366 7; scharrer (2002b), p. 292, with further references; scharrer (2004), p. 311, with further refe- rences. 29 chatty (2002), p. 1; Gichon (1991), p. 321; parker (2002), p. 77; stark (2002), p. 366; staubli (1991), p. 14; sweet (1965), p. 113740; Zagarell (1988), p. 357. 30 bloch-smith (2003), p. 4023; brass (1996), p. 856; connor (1994), p. 1003; enloe (1996), p. 1978; fishman (1996), p. 634; hartwig (1988), p. 1424; hutchinson and smith (1996a), p. 37; nash (1996); pollard (2000), p. 111; schermerhorn (1996), p. 17; schneckener (1998); sollors (1996a), p. xi-xii; Tschpe (1988), p. 137; Weber (1996), p. 5660; Wenning (1993), 245 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east ing, but that ethnicity rather is a permanent process, with changing identities and the genesis of new ethnic groups. 31 some groups can thus merge with other ethnic groups by taking over their identity, or by forming a new identity together with the other group, but it is still possible that some groups preserve traits of their identities to different degrees. 32 Within this complex the concept of tribe needs to be discussed briely, as a tribal structure is generally regarded as one of the main characteristics of nomadic societies. 33 There has been written much about tribalism, and some remarks may fall into the category of tribe and prejudice, one of them being that tribalism pre- supposes nomadism. 34 Generally the same characteristics that in scholarship are applied to ethnic groups are regarded as characteristics of the tribe. The most im- portant aspect, however, is the claim of a common ancestry and thus the supposed kinship of the members of the tribe. 35 as such a tribe can have a number of clans as social sub-units. 36 Widely discussed is also the question of the political organiza- tion of a tribe. on the one hand it is claimed that tribal social structure in general is homogeneous, with hardly any social stratiication, and that if there is a chieftain, the latter is without much real force. 37 basically, tribes are regarded not as stable ethnic units, but also as changeable. 38 although, as i have argued, tribalism is basi- cally regarded as the characteristic feature of nomadic social life, it is clear that tribalism is not restricted to nomads and other mobile ethnic groups, but can be found also in settled communities. 39 To draw a larger picture, two main concepts have been introduced, namely the notions of segmentary and dimorphic societies. segmentary societies are marked by different equal social groups without a central instance of power. 40 according to the concept of the dimorphic society, which has p. 558. see also barth (1996), p. 296; heckmann (1997), 503; isaac (1998c), p. 25960; Jenkins (1997), p. 913; p. 1920; Kohl (1998), p. 2702; pohl (1998). 31 barth (1996), p. 30709; 31820; Giordano (1997), p. 605; Kohl (1998), p. 2759. see also cohen (1996b), p. 374; Jenkins (1997), p. 13; 40; Jenkins (1999), p. 88. 32 bloch-smith (2003), p. 4034; hartwig (1988), p. 1434; Tschpe (1988), p. 1378. 33 Knig (1981), p. 289; scholz (1995), p. 31. see marx (1992), p. 2556; rets (2003), p. 113; Tanner (1997), p. 7; Zagarell (1988), p. 357. 34 against this view e.g. Kaizer (2002), p. 53, followed by scharrer (2003), p. 734. cf. macdo- nald (1993), p. 3523; Tanner (1997), p. 78. 35 donner (1999), p. 28; fleckenstein (1988), p. 237; hoyland (2001), p. 1135; Jenkins (1997), p. 178; Khazanov (1994), p. 140; Knig (1981), p. 289; Kupershoek (2001), p. 23; orth- mann (2002), p. 2035; paul (2003), p. 28; peters (1999a), p. xiv. on different notions of tribe see Tanner (1997), p. 56. 36 Giddens (1986), p. 53; Knig (1981), p. 289; fleckenstein (1988), p. 1921; schneider (2003a), p. 1723. cf. connor (1994), p. 1078. 37 Giddens (1986), p. 53; hoyland (2001), p. 11920. 38 cohen (1996a), p. 8384; marx (1992), p. 258; stark (2002), p. 369; fleckenstein (1988), p. 2731. on chimpanzees forming new tribal groups, see scharrer and petrischak (2000). 39 Khazanov (1994), p. XXXVi; isaac (1998b), p. 155; Knauf (1992), p. 637; macdonald (1993), p. 3523; robinson (1996), p. 433. 40 brggemann (1988), p. 7201; dijkstra (1995), p. 13; Khazanov (1994), p. 1447; Kohl (1998), p. 2734; orthmann (2002), p. 2058; paul (2003), p. 28; sigrist (1994), p. 301. see 246 Ulf scharrer been developed by rowton, 41 there is an institutional and social interaction bet- ween sedentary and nomadic worlds, with a chief mostly living in a village or a town and part of a society being nomads and another part being sedentary. both concepts are thus to a great extent applicable to the political and social relations between settled and nomadic groups. nomadism and eThniciTY in The roman near easT against this theoretical background i will now turn to the issue of nomadic peoples and their ethnicity in the roman near east. it must be noted that, when later in this essay the nomadic relations to the roman authorities will be analysed, the problem of the nabataeans will not be discussed in the context neither the question to what extent they may have been nomadic, nor the roman-nabataean relations as both aspects have been discussed extensively. 42 evidence for nomadism in the roman near east can be found in archaeologi- cal material, in Greek, latin and islamic authors, and inally in Greek, latin and semitic inscriptions. each group of sources has speciic problems of interpretation. regional surveys in north-arabia have revealed countless numbers of stone circles and enclosures, which apparently are remains of nomadic dwellings. Unfortunately these remains are dificult to date and can mostly not be ascribed to a speciic ethnic group. sometimes the building remains are supplemented by ceramics, which re- veal periods of use. 43 in any case, in most instances conclusions cannot be drawn with regard to the ethnicity of the relevant groups: most of the ceramics are naba- taean and this shows that there were contacts, but it reveals nothing about the iden- tity or structure of the people using the enclosures. fortunately these are often cov- also hoyland (2001), p. 115. on the history of research on segmentary societies see sigrist (1994), p. 219. see the critical remarks of porten (2004), p. 70. 41 e.g. rowton (1976). The concept is followed e.g. by dever (1992), p. 86; dijkstra (1990), p. 903; hauser (1998), p. 5134; sommer (2003a), p. 112; sommer (2005), p. 957. on the concept see also briant (1982), p. 48; rets (2003), p. 1145; staubli (1986), p. 145; scharrer (2002b), p. 2956, with further references including citicism of the concept. 42 on the nabataeans see e.g. altheim and stiehl (196469) i, p. 3140; p. 6579; p. 281304; ball (2000), p. 6073; bowersock (1983), p. 1227 and p. 5775; bowersock (1994b), p. 105 12; briquel-chatonnet (1995b); butcher (2003), p. 968; dijkstra (1995), p. 3474; dussaud (1955), p. 2170; Gawlikowski (1995b), p. 857; Graf (1997c); hammond (1973); healey (1989); hoyland (2001), p. 704; levi (1989), p. 36; millar (1993), p. 4008; parker (1986a), p. 11522; sartre (1982a), p. 12832; sartre (1985), p. 5168; sartre (1989), p. 1423; sartre (2005), p. 1623, p. 806, p. 2378 and p. 2512. The idea of a nabataean bedouin-state has been proposed by Knauf (1992), p. 6378, and has in my view reasonably been challenged by macdonald (1991); see also Kuhnen (1991), p. 3279. on roman-nabataean relations see bennett (1997), p. 175; bowersock (1983), p. 348 and p. 4956; funke (1989); sartre (1985), p. 51. 43 see e.g. adams e.a. (1977), p. 369; King (1990), p. 589; parr e.a. (1978), p. 445; Zarins e.a. (1979), p. 315. on the archaeological interpretation of material remains of nomads, see gene- rally banning and Khler-roleffson (1992); Guldin (2002); lyonnet (2004); nser (2005). 247 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east ered with rock drawings, which often allow a rough classiication. 44 This is espe- cially due to the grafiti which in great numbers accompany the drawings and in still greater numbers stand for themselves. They provide invaluable evidence for the everyday life, the problems and the social and economic structures of nomadic groups. still, their interpretation in many resprects is not always as unambiguous as one might assume at irst glance, as the remarks below attempt to show. as i will shortly argue in more detail, one of the problems is how the epigraphic and ar- chaeological material could correspond to the litarary evidence provided by Greek, latin and islamic authors. These themselves are often problematic: especially much of the islamic material is interlaced with legends, and often it is not always clear whether the statements of the authors Greek, latin and islamic apply to the pe- riod they are writing about, and accordingly to what degree they simply retell evi- dence from much older sources, and to what degree they follow certain literary traditions and hence use literary topoi in describing foreign peoples. 45 in literary and epigraphic texts from the irst two centuries of roman rule in the near east numerous explicit references are made to nomades and scenitae, tent- dwellers. 46 according to strabo and pliny nomads can be found in mesopotamia, 47
and especially on the right bank of the euphates, 48 from the region of Thapsacus 49
up to the persian Gulf. 50 furthermore nomads are mentioned as dwelling between the euphrates and coele syria 51 and east of apameia 52 and of the Jordan. 53 finally nomads are recorded as dwelling in syria 54 and of course in northern arabia. 55 The literary evidence for the presence of nomads in syria and northern arabia is sup- 44 on rock drawings see anati (1972). 45 on ancient authors on nomadism, see boshnakov (2003), p. 1149; briant (1982), p. 1140; capomacchia (2004); Graf (1989a), p. 3556; hoyland (2001), p. 967; Khazanov (1994), p. 69; levi (1989), p. 33; scharrer (2004), with further references; schmitt (2005), p. 417; stark (2002), p. 364. on ancient ethnography see e.g. briant (1982), p. 101; schneider (1998), p. 956 and p. 10610; Zst rov (1984); scharrer (2002a), p. 13944; scharrer (2002c), p. 1689, each with further references. on pliny see macadam (1989), p. 2901; macadam (1989), p. 2957; rets (2003), p. 332; sallmann (1971); on strabo see brodersen (1993); drijvers (1998); Winters (2000); scharrer (2002c), p. 197, with further references. strabos use of earlier sources is exempliied by boshnakov (2003); see also sartre (1989), p. 140. on di- odorus see mayer (2000); on ptolemy see macadam (1989), p. 3015; Wallace (2000), p. 1419. see also bowersock (1973), p. 1356; macdonald (2001), p. 251. on byzantine au- thors see dostlov (1990), p. 1712; Zst rov (1990). 46 on the term skenitai/scenitae see scharrer (2002c), p. 1979. Wolff (2003), p. 135, presents them wrongly as tribe. on akkadian sources see ephal (1982), p. 101. 47 strabo 16.2.11; 16.3.1. 48 plin. HN 6.125; 143; strabo 16.1.28. 49 plin. HN 5.87; strabo 16.1.8 50 plin. HN 6.125; 148; 151; strabo 16.1.26. 51 strabo 16.1.27. 52 strabo 16.2.11. 53 plin. HN 5.72. 54 strabo 16.4.2; plin. HN 5.65. 55 see e.g. strabo 16.4.2; diod. 2.54.1. it is debated, whether diodorus excurse on arabia is a quotation from posidonius. see scharrer (2002a), p. 144 with further references. 248 Ulf scharrer plemented by a couple of Greek inscriptions which explicitly mention nomads, 56
and a latin inscription from Khan Kosseir probably referring to scenitic arabs. 57 an invaluable source of evidence in this context are the so-called Thamudic and safaitic inscriptions, the former being found mainly in the northern-western part of the arabian peninsula, the latter in syria east of the Jordan. Two of the main themes in the safaitic inscriptions are migration and the breeding of animals: many grafiti mention somebody making a journey, 58 passing through, 59 leaving, 60 arri- ving 61 or simply being temporarily present 62 or camping 63 at a place, and moving camp. 64 numerous grafiti testify claims of ownership of camping-places, 65 of pastures, 66 of ields, 67 of valleys, 68 of water places, 69 of different kinds of buil- dings 70 and of other places, 71 among them remarks that a certain place belongs to 56 OGIS 421,5 (= IGRR iii 1136; moors (1992), p. 316 nr. 3a); 616 (= IGRR iii 1247); IGRR iii 1254 (= PAAES iii 378; moors (1992), p. 317); PAAES iii 383; PUAES iii a 751 (= moors (1992), p. 316 nr.3b). These inscriptions are published and commented by sartre (1982a), p. 1216. see also moors (1992), p. 3156. other inscriptions mentioning nomads: Inv. X 44,4 (= PAT 1378; asad and Yon (2001), nr.16; SEG Vii 139 (Greek section only); Kaizer (2002), p. 478; schuol (2000), p. 846, with comments; hartmann (2001), p. 523); dussaud and macler (1901), p. 147 nr. 7; macdonald (1995), p. 99. 57 CIL iii 128. 58 e.g. CIS V 313; 320; Wh 238; 1846; 2023; 20601; 2831; 2066; 2071; 2086; 2502; 2700; 3791; PUAES iV c 353; 701; 1006; 1190; ISB 18; 130; 400; PAAES iV 5,12; 17; 23; SIJ 37; 54; 329; 452. see also Wh 2181. 59 e.g. CIS V 27; 28; 3961; 4824; Wh 149; 741; PUAES iV c 448; SIJ 499. 60 Wh 19; 158; 825; 1200a; 1230; 1241; 1243; 1768; 2124; 2322; 2357; 3237; PUAES iV c 160; 676; SIJ 152. 61 CIS V 62; 99; 112; 278; 329; 1065; 2310; 2405; 2459; 2497; 2579; 2649; 2746; 3131; 3171; 4417; 4757; SIJ 80; 714; 840; Wh 648; 2129; PUAES iV c 7; 217; 245; 254; 257; 299; 434; 712; 719; 720; ISB 58; PAAES iV 5,4. 62 PAAES iV 5,134; SIJ 873; Wh 2242; 3792a. 63 ISB 146; Wh 158; 411; 610; 792; 1096a-b; 1701; 1994; 2052; 2706; 2803; PUAES iV c 29; 146; 161; 162; 169; 183; 184; 189; 258; 361; 369; 379; 396; 553; 568; 571; 574; 635; 641; 644; 658; 659; 753; 1025; 1028; 1109; 1169; 1181; 1182; 1195; PAAES iV 5; 114; SIJ 818. a cam- ping place (dr) is mentioned e.g. in Wh 69; 1225. see also below, n. 77. 64 e.g. CIS V 307; SIJ 184; Wh 37475; 377; 496; 707; 3136. 65 e.g. ISB 2; 117; 120; 125; 210; 367; 437; Wh 346; 349; 363; 415; 704; 766; 798; 808; 814; 864; 924a; 1065; 1071; 1107; 1119; 1133; 1193; 1230; 1339; 1365; 1747; 1754; 1755; 1797; 1885; 1924; 1966; 2293; 2473a; 2499; 2558; 2539b; 2644; 2733; 2738; 2742; 27423; 2832; 2854; 2859; 2863; 2867; 2900; 2907; 2934; 2937; 2971; 3049; 3262; 3349; 3366; 3381; 3412; 3527; 3636; 3812; 3859; SIJ 370 (?). see also Wh 3708. 66 e.g. Wh 30. 67 e.g. PUAES iV c 1290. 68 e.g. SIJ 712; Wh 1638; 3335; PUAES iV c 534. 69 e.g. Wh 1002; 1503c; PUAES iV c 853; 904. 70 stone enclosure (wd): 1103a; PUAES iV c 219. shelter: SIJ 296; 948; Wh 405406; 564; 2188; 3017; 3050; 3094; 3112a; 3186; 3208a; 3435b; 3442; 3597; 3736b; 3840; ISB 32; 429. house: Wh 1322; 2456; PUAES iV c 949 ISB 20. halting-place: Wh 3428. building in gene- ral: Wh 967; 3098. rock: SIJ 964; Wh 1753; 1807; 3037; 3050; 3082a; 3736b; 3840. mound: SIJ 484. 71 ISB 296; Wh 1411; PUAES iV c 38; 199; 229; 319; 321; 758; 827; 851; 872; 890; 1019; 1163; 1164; 1180; 1214. place in general: SIJ 610; 997; Wh 2805. 249 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east somebody year after year (m fm). 72 The temporary presence could be a stay overnight 73 or the residence for a whole season. 74 accordingly, some grafiti men- tion a spring encampment, 75 pitching of tents, 76 or the ownership of a camping- place year after year. 77 from other inscriptions that mention (or pray for) return 78
it is obvious that most of the migrations were not linear, i.e. not in one direction. The latter aspect leads to the topic of the breeding of animals. some grafiti mention the seeking of pastures 79 or the following of animals. 80 sometimes the animals that are bred or pastured are not speciied, 81 but often they are. mention is made of the tending of sheep, 82 of goats, 83 of both, 84 of cattle, 85 of horses 86 and of camels. 87 accordingly, these animals are often depicted in the grafiti. 88 most often 72 e.g. Wh 1916; 2717; 2998; 3757; 3800. 73 e.g. CIS V 230; 404; 1095; 2031; 3568; 4987; 5050; PUAES iV c 350; 595; PAAES iV 5,123; SIJ 139. 74 spring: SIJ 705; 1008; Wh 181; 325; 403; 790; 1202; 1232; 1271; 3923; PUAES iV c 374; 465; 1103; 1291; lidzbarski (1908), p. 42; PAAES iV 5,5. summer: SIJ 104; Wh 289; 298; 423; 465a; 622/23; 1191; 1765; 1996a; 2399; 3049; 34234 3850; 3787; Khraysheh (1995), nr. 6. Winter: CIS V 681; 2829; 4810; Wh 1361; PUAES iV c 649; SIJ 252; 1008. 75 Wh 766. 76 e.g. PUAES iV c 344; Wh 641a. 77 Wh 1193; ISB 2; SIJ 171. 78 e.g. SIJ 836; Wh 184; 387; 711; 799; 822; 927; 1021; 1023; 1024; 1373b/c; 1519a; PUAES iV c 1213. 79 PUAES iV c 379; PAAES iV 5,110; dussaud (1907), p. 101 (dussaud and macler (1901), nr. 161). 80 ISB 13. 81 e.g. CIS V 34; 155; 207; 269; 272; 275; 362; 433; 586; 652; 686; 892; 1138; 1167; 1172; 1235; 1239; 1667; 2003; 2005; 2166; 2206; 2213; 2299; 2391; 2570; 2758; 2926; 2941; 3131; 3020; 3181; 3234; 3290; 3526; 4027; 4303; 4394; 4435; 4717; 5044; ISB 112; 250; SIJ 170; 218; 473; 673; 744; 1006; Wh 26; 64; 74; 75; 156; 171; 319; 376; 419; 585; 597; 710; 746; 784; 799; 925; 1066; 1120; 1199; 1231; 1361; 1413 (?); 1699; 1771; 1772; 1867a; 2042; 2072; 2114; 2139; 2142; 2149; 2468; 2532; 2654; 3104; 3396; 3636; 3691; ISB 50; 79; 82; PAAES iV 5,135; Khraysheh (1994). slaughtering: PUAES iV c 290; 297. 82 e.g. CIS V 275; 744; 847; 1534; 1993; 2163; 2481; 2552; 3143; 3216; 3577; 4443; 4987; Wh 578; 582; 1023; 1282; 2036; 2808; 3534c; PUAES iV c 326; 331; 344; 355; 562a; 674; 1134; SIJ 156; 181; 263; 392. on sheep see eissfeldt (1954a), p. 1035. 83 e.g. CIS V 1276; 2286; 2311; 2647; 3235; 3260; 4148; 4772; 4973; 4989; 5050; SIJ 153; 688; 807; Wh 19; 159; 1410; 1673; 1682; 169798; 1725a-b; 2161; 3562; PUAES iV c 157; 351; 360; 419; 722; 729; 1064; PAAES iV 5,122; Zeinaddin (2000), inscr.11. on goats and noma- dism see scholz (1995), p. 556. 84 e.g. Wh 1141; 1246a; 1900; 2119; 2165; 2802; PUAES iV c 297; 887; 1133. 85 e.g. CIS V 310; 1216; 1871; 2713; 3064; 4392; PUAES iV c 90; 159; Zeinaddin (2000), in- scr. 4. on cattle and nomadism see scholz (1995), p. 567. 86 e.g. CIS V 3186; 4446; 4855; PUAES iV c 664; SIJ 745; Wh 2803; 3049; 3735; King (1990), p. 64. see also NSI 109. 87 e.g. CIS V 88; 98; 272; 1338; 1456; 1486; 1783; 1906; 2160; 2167; 2459; 2556; 2943; 3020; 3230; 3961; 3975; 4233; 4815; 4933; 4985; 5089; 5178; 5182; 5288; Wh 42; 161; 238; 325; 348; 581; 806; 1023; 1198; 1308; 1899; 1996a; 2006; 2044; 2145; 3093; 3500; PUAES iV c 4; 146; 179; 357; 406; 448; 613; 656; 698; 701; 968; 1214; 1291; 1873; 3405; 3435a; SIJ 18; 118; 201; 263; 295; 323; 806; ryckmans (1939), nr. 34. 88 drawings of: Goats: e.g. Wh 343. sheep: e.g. PUAES iV c 1179. bull: e.g. Wh 3675b. 250 Ulf scharrer we ind the drawings of camels 89 and within this category of she-camels. 90 This corresponds to the fact that she-camels are sometimes speciically mentioned in the grafiti. 91 as one inscription reveals they provided milk, 92 which may exclear their predominance amongst the drawings. remarkably, hardly a drawing of a camel ri- der can be found amongst the safaitic grafiti. on the other hand there are quite a number of drawings of riders on horses and on donkeys. There are numerous dra- wings of riders armed with lances, either ighting each other or ighting an animal, or just being alone. 93 however, horses are not only presented in violent actions: some inscriptions mention horses following the livestock. 94 The importance of horse and donkey appears then to be remarkable, especially since the importance of horses for near eastern nomadic life has sometimes been denied. 95 some inscripti- ons simply refer to being on the look-out for horses. 96 others refer to the keeping of donkeys, 97 and quite a couple of drawings depict donkeys and horse in situations other than warlike. 98 89 CIS V 1005; 1148; 1215; 1552; 1615; 1658; 1852; 1855; 2662; 2773; 3595; 36323; 3659; 4009; 4011; 4631; 4670; 4835; 5042; ISB 367; Wh 57; 370; 424; 472; 47677 (bactrian ca- mels! see also: SIJ 360); 516; 642; 731; 739; 805; 911; 1228; 1266 (?); 1502; 1587; 1918; 200911a; 2012; 1278a; 1762; 3314; 3760; 3850; 3912b; PUAES iV c 7375; 8082; 312; 420; 1002; 1104; 1294; 1298; PAAES iV 5,5; 14; SIJ 60; 258; 341; 415; 424; 616; 803; Knauf (1991), p. 95. see littmann (1940), p. 245. 90 e.g. CIS V 187; 235; 257; 519; 533; 594; 1510; 1572; 1627; 1666; 1669; 1738; 1782; 18056; 23512; 2363; 2378; 2391; 2401; 2445; 2484; 2623; 2855; 2877; 2895; 2928; 2998; 3070; 3073; 3137; 3309; 3367; 3420; 3620; 3779; 3807; 4527; 4784; 4830; 4871; 5293; SIJ 341; 307; 473; 654; 415; 424; 473; 654; 731; 780; 987; 1005; Wh 148a; 176; 178; 182; 192; 286; 344; 362; 402; 544; 576; 730; 791; 815; 1236; 1237; 1240; 1248; 1250; 1277; 1655; 170506; 1750; 1778; 1945; 2008; 2018; 2112; 2254; 2442; 2530; 2629; 2639a; 2650; 2673; 2731; 2732; 2737; 2739; 2740; 2748; 2763; 2775; 2783; 2833b; 2942; 2989; 3024; 3157; 3166; 3205; 3211; 3227; 3249; 3276; 3317; 3395; 3418; 3437; 3558a; 3615b; 3627; 3744; 3855; 3903; 3926; PUAES iV c 169; 210; 28284; 312; 317; 442; 448; 449; 482; 586; 931; 1021; 1039; 1061; 1076; 1159; 1165; ISB 19; 126; 135; 1413; 165; 399; 414; 4236. see also Wh 3663. see the far less dra- wings of male camels: Wh 2741; 2780; 2782; 3097; 3283; 3811; PUAES iV c 333. 91 e.g. ISB 366; Wh 402; 1234; 2182; 3153; 3197b; PUAES iV c 335; 426. 92 Wh 1031. 93 rider with lance on donkey: e.g. Wh 125. horseman with lance: e.g. CIS V 1282; 1347; 1490; 1630; 2791; ISB 153; Wh 761. horseman lancing a gazelle: e.g. SIJ 63; Wh 368; 431; 627; 2067; 3170. horseman lancing a lion: e.g. PUAES iV c 1292. horseman lancing animals: ISB 154; 166; Wh 2053; 2109. horsemen ighting each other: e.g Wh 782; PUAES iV c 462; 573. 94 e.g. Wh 1677b; 1700a. see also a drawing of a lanced horseman with camels: PUAES iV c 325. 95 e.g. scholz (1995), p. 60. on the importance of the horse in safaitic inscriptions see ryckmans (1942), p. 131. 96 e.g. Wh 54. 97 e.g. ISB 117; 146; PAAES iV 5,23; Wh 231012; 2870 (she-donkeys); 3092; 3548; 36567a. 98 donkeys: e.g. CIS V 505; 898; 1012; 1357; 1442; 1615; 2040; 2121; 2411; 2840; 2973; 4957; SIJ 436; Wh 218; 284; 490; 744a; 1648; PUAES iV c 457; 514. see also pictures of donkeys: e.g. Wh 1832; 2448; 3281; 3388; 3486; 3642; 3767, esp. she-donkeys: Wh 2878; 34234. horses: e.g. CIS V 159; 439; 498; 766; 1127; 1186; 1228; 1314; 1553; 1777; 1855; 2210; 2916; 4467; 4614; 4619; 4855; SIJ 771; Wh 738; 1457a; 1502; 1743; 1779; 2531; 2571; 3911; 251 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east it is thus apparent that on the basis of the deinition of nomadism presented above the writers of the safaitic inscriptions are to be considered as nomads, since the migration with the animals is one of the main aspects in these grafiti. 99 some authors consider them to have been bedouins, assuming a predominant importance of the camel. 100 occasionally they are simply termed as shepherds. 101 indeed, some inscriptions mention the east or the desert (mdbr) as a place of temporary presence, 102 especially for pasturing. 103 a certain ausn even regards the sight of the desert as being delightful. 104 i have referred earlier to modern efforts to distin- guish between different forms of nomadism by the animals being bred and accor- dingly the regions being dwelled. The safaitic inscriptions, however, refer also to other animals than camels as being kept in the desert: 105 some grafiti mention mo- ving towards the desert with sheep 106 and heading eastwards with camels and live- stock. 107 Keeping sheep and camels together is mentioned too, 108 and hence the idea of distinct forms of nomadism with respect to safaitic tribes needs to be modi- ied. 109 it is obvious also from the remarks in the preceding section that it is inappropriate to refer to the writers of the safaitic inscriptions as bedouins. 110 The other important group of inscriptions are the so-called Thamudic grafiti, whose motifs are often similar to those of the safaitic texts: there are references to 3912b; PUAES iV c 464; 566; 1136; ISB 91. horseman not being armed: e.g. Wh 811; 990; PUAES iV c 1297. on the horse in safaitic drawings see macdonald (1996). 99 see the important article of macdonald (1992), followed e.g. by sartre (1990), p. 44. see also isaac (1998b), p. 154; hoyland (2001), p. 65; parker (2002), p. 77; sartre 1991, 315; 333; sartre (2005), p. 2345. see furthermore altheim and stiehl (196469) i, p. 280; asad and Yon (2001), p. 30; contini (1987), p. 37; eissfeldt (1954a), p. 1001; Graf (1989a), p. 3678; Grushevoi (1985), p. 51; macdonald (2001), p. 252; moors (1992), p. 283; parker (1986a), p. 118; ryckmans (1942), p. 132; sartre (1997), p. 316; starcky [1956], p. 202 and p. 204; Wolff (2003), p. 154. 100 e.g. PAAES iV, p. 1068; oxtoby (1968), p. 18, emphasises the predominance of camel. on the evidence for the use of horses he assumes that some may have been full bedouin, others only half bedouin. The predominance of the camel is also assumed by isaac (1998b), p. 154; sartre 1991, 315; 333, but without the term bedouin. The writers of the safaitic inscriptions are called bedouins also e.g. by caskel (1954), p. 42; dirven (1999), p. 27; Gawlikowski (1995a), p. 106; hartmann (2001), p. 82; Knauf (1991), p. 97; littmann (1940), p. 23; 25; King (1990), p. 63; schlumberger (1951), p. 131. see also Gichon (1991), passim. cf. isaac (1998b), p. 124. 101 sartre (1990), p. 434. 102 desert: e.g. Wh 742; 927; 2395b; 2816; 2621; 3800; PUAES iV c 719. east: e.g. SIJ 45; 132; 206; 208; 836; 897; 911; Wh 173; 175; 732; 1675; 18501; 1856; 2125; 2128; 2166. Going eastward to the desert: e.g. Wh 589; 1137; 1139/40; 1855; PUAES iV c 180; 602. Going southwards: Wh 2110; 2143; 3559a; 3719. 103 e.g. Wh 784; 1066; 1361; 2327. 104 Wh 1604. 105 on being in the desert with camels: e.g. Wh 806; 1198. 106 e.g. Wh 578; 582: rdf hn lmdbr. 107 e.g. Wh 1700a. 108 Wh 1023. 109 see isaac (1998f), p. 412. 110 see macdonald 1991, 10203; macdonald (1993), p. 327. 252 Ulf scharrer movement, 111 camping, 112 shepherding, 113 and camels. 114 Thamudic rock-drawings depict mainly camels, and furthermore human igures, sometimes equipped with bows and spears. some drawings show camel- and horse-riders, sometimes with a lance, similar to the safaitic drawings. 115 The Thamudic inscriptions raise the question of ethnicity. although it still ap- pears in scholarly literature rather frequently, 116 it has now for long been clear that it is inappropriate to speak of the safaites as a speciic ethnic unit, however one deines it. 117 however, the safaitic inscriptions mention a great number of collec- tive names, all referred to as l. 118 among them are a few texts which maybe refer 111 e.g. Ph. 238c; 244; 271aj; 271al; 275m; 277a6; 277k3; 279m2; 279al4; 279aw2; 291b4; 297n9; 332g; 351f; 363ag2; 363ai; 366q; 367j; ITham hU135; hU152; hU142; hU261; hU3634; hU369; hU411; hU425; hU491; hU512; hU545; hU779; hU801; Jsa148; Jsa207; Jsa390; Jsa489; Jsa505; Jsa513; Jsa580; Jsa605; dgty52,3; Winnett and reed (1970), p. 131 nr. 72. 112 e.g. ITham hU80; hU135; hU259; hU287; hU350; hU361; hU388; hU408; hU691a; hU776; Jsa211; Jsa241; Jsa243; Jsa343; Jsa4223; Jsa429; Jsa487; Jsa517; Jsa50910; Jsa513; Jsa624; Jsa643; dgty69; Ph. 237e; 238n; 250b; 257a; 258f; 266ac; 266ag; 266aj; 267k; 271ap; 275a; 276g; 279m1; 279t; 297n2; 299d; 299j; 314h; 328e; 340f; 345l1; 348l; 351s1; 353z; 358ad; 358ao; 366n; 367q2; 369e; 373b; littmann (1940), nrs. 78; 80; Winnett and reed (1970), p. 137 nr. 100. 113 e.g. ITham hU163; littmann (1940), nr. 82; Winnett and reed (1970), p. 87 nr. 55. 114 e.g. Ph. 266o; 266y1; 270c; 275d-e; 279ap; 292k; ITham eut44; hU103; hU109; hU161; hU166; hU197; hU226; hU248; hU269; hU284; hU 2914; hU296; hU 299; hU3102; hU315; hU318; hU336; hU356; hU366; hU397; hU413; hU424; hU4446; hU489; hU501a; hU524; hU530; hU554; hU556; hU624; hU647; hU765; Jsa254; Jsa326;Jsa233; Jsa243; Jsa361; Jsa367; Jsa491; Jsa496; Jsa626; Jsa5346; Jsa597; Jsa640; Jsa6501; Jsa661; Jsa6623; Jsa667; Jsa673; dgty16,4; dgty47; littmann (1940), nrs. 68; 81; Winnett and reed (1970), p. 85 nr. 45; p. 131 nr.72. she-camels: littmann (1940), p. 668; 71. 115 e.g. Garrard and harvey (1981), p. 142; parr e.a. (1978), p. 48; Zarins e.a. (1979), p. 301; Whalen e.a. (1981), p. 54; Zarins e.a. (1981), p. 36. 116 e.g. altheim and stiehl (196469) i, p. 280; contini (1987), p. 45; 50; dussaud (1907), p. 2 and p. 21; dussaud (1955), p. 13547; oxtoby (1968), p. 145; Knauf (1991), p. 98; sartre (1982a), p. 122; sartre (1990), p. 39 and p. 42; sartre (1991), p. 315 and p. 333; sartre (1997), 316. 117 see Graf (1989a), p. 358; macdonald (1993), p. 30410; ryckmans (1942), p. 1324; sartre (1989), p. 151; sartre (1997), p. 298; sartre (2005), p. 234; Zeinaddin (2000), p. 267. 118 esp. the tribes of: Abd (SIJ 682); Ail (CIS V 66; 305; 321); min (Zeinaddin (2000), in- scr.2); Amrat (macdonald (2005), p. 120; Khraysheh (1995), nr.12; 56; with Graf (1989a), p. 360; milik (1980)); Ana (CIS V 347); Arfat (CIS V 1277); Arsat (Zeinaddin (2000), in- scr.7); Aall (Wh 8); ty (Zeinaddin (2000), inscr.1); Aun (PUAES iV c 160); Alal (SIJ 41; 630; 658); Ar (CIS V 1664); Ara (PUAES iV c 639); Awkat (ingholt and starcky (1951), nr. 63.2); M (Wh 1771); QS (Wh 2587); Aaqt (CIS V 3192); Aw (CIS V 65; 320; 638; 740; 4394; 4438; 4529; 4568; SIJ 59; 74; 80; 206; Wh 163; 966; 1144; PUAES iV c 325; 342; 361; 540; 1182; SIJ 39; ingholt and starcky (1951), nrs. 60; 63.4; see Graf (1989a), p. 3613; moors (1992), p. 283); Awwm (CIS V 2481); BD (Wh 866b); bst (macdonald (2003b), p. 278); Baad (CIS V 2577; 4394; 4447); Bar (CIS V 1758; SIJ 133); Badan (SIJ 237); Bsi (CIS V 5279; Wh 2815; 2875); Baswn (CIS V 102. probably also CIS V 103 (Baws)); Bawgi (CIS V 2955); Bigd (PUAES iV c 1188); Dawyi (CIS V 5175); Daaf (CIS V 777; 1952; 2544; 2578; 2721; 2949; 4388; Wh 19; see Graf (1989a), p. 363); Dhib (CIS V 4039); aif (CIS V 318; 1573; 1649; 1679; 2839; 2843; 4304; 4439; 5361; SIJ 54; 88; 93; 132; 8234; Wh 17; 1517; 2021; 174; 1673; 1692; 1698; 1700ab; 1727; 2042; 2239; 2606; 253 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east to villages. 119 some inscriptions give collective names with the praeix h- (-ite). 120
Unfortunately, the term l can have a number of meanings on different levels: it can signify a people, a tribe, a clan or a family, 121 and it is therefore in most cases unclear what it actually meant. in bilingual inscriptions (which are very rare) l is rendered in different ways. The famous safaitic-Greek bilingual from s docu- ments that the Ubait set up a statue for a certain maleikhat for the building of a temple. in the Greek version the safaitic term l Ubait is translated as ogo o 2803; 3498; PUAES iV c 360; 687; SIJ 38); Fasrn (CIS V 5287); Farat (CIS V 4037. SIJ 58; 241 (Farith); lidzbarski (1908), p. 45 (Farn)); Fihr (PUAES iV c 1064); FR (Wh 367); FY (Wh 3562. The name may also be GY); Gdhil (CIS V 2268); Gam (CIS V 2657); Gabar (CIS V 4332); Gr (SIJ 246); Gurr (CIS V 2155); (ha-)Bagg (ISB 176); ha-Dharr (CIS V 3663; 3663; PUAES iV c 397; 70; PAAES iV 5,6); Hshim b. Gumair (PUAES iV c 234); BB (Wh 1607); abb (littmann (1940), nr. 28); fy (Zeinaddin (2000), inscr.3); gg (CIS V 2823; milik (1960), p. 96); amad (CIS V 1302); Harim (littmann (1940), nr. 10; PUAES iV c 435); awlat (PUAES iV c 344); an (SIJ 714); ibq (CIS V 4767; Zeinad- din (2000), inscr. 18); umaiy (PUAES iV c 254; 255); uay (SIJ 295; 319; 320; 323; 342; 3489; 361; 455; 590; 607; 634; 909); JR (Wh 1232); Khil (CIS V 2192; 2318; 2297); Khtil (PAAES iV 5,113); Kawkab (CIS V 65; 304; 320; Wh 2818); Kawn (CIS V 2843; 4064; 4079); Khims (PUAES iV c 674); Khumn (PUAES iV c 419); Mis (ingholt and starcky (1951), nr. 8 ); Mniy (CIS V 2634; 4987); Msikat (SIJ 207; 283; 287; 3101; 314; 644; 684. 6112; 7867; 8345; 6213 (ha-Msik)); Maar (littmann (1940), nr. 29); .M. (Wh 2802); Murib (ISB 57); Mukabbil (CIS V 1763); Nafr (PUAES iV c 1266); Nabar (CIS V 58; 1368; 2113; 2576; 2577; 3261; 3263; 3648; 4446; PUAES iV c 348; 349; 361; 708; PAAES iV 5,123; 125); Nasr (ingholt and starcky (1951), nr. 82a); Naaril (Wh 2147); nmr (atallah (1995), nr. 8); Qadam (PUAES iV c 435); Qamm (CIS V 5050); Qamar (CIS V 8; 1414; 1868; 1870; 1951; 1952; 3757; 4278; 4828; 4845; 4944; SIJ 840; Wh 729; 1003; with Graf (1989a), p. 3656); Qaiu (PUAES iV a 11); Qam (CIS V 26; 2721; 4441; 4755; Wh 154; 2817; 2820; 3561; PUAES iV c 707); Qu (Khraysheh (1995), nr.4); Qumair (PUAES iV c 254; 255; PAAES iV 5,127); Rabbil (CIS V 2790); Rahya (CIS V 742; 2670); Raw (CIS V 5162; PUAES iV a 43; PUAES iV c 1269; littmann (1939), nr.1; with Graf (1989a), p. 364); Raf at (CIS V 4358; Wh 149); Rubat (?) (dussaud and macler (1901), p. 48, nr.32b); RFT (Wh 3931); RKS (Wh 2837); Saadil (CIS V 556; 781; 4754; Wh 1141); Sad (CIS V 4389); ab (SIJ 59); Salam (PUAES iV a 44; with Graf (1989a), p. 3645); Salmn (CIS V 1157); Siml (CIS V 1290); SB (Wh 77); SBT (Wh 1700a); adddat (CIS V 3194); SHWT wa-HBN (Wh 2147, two tribes?); am (CIS V 743; 847; Khraysheh (1994)); mit (Wh 1867a); DT (Wh 2005); aar (CIS V 4772); abbat (dussaud and macler (1901), p. 53, nr. 65); ab (Wh 3420); akhr (PAAES iV 5,51); Slimi (CIS V 4646); awari (CIS V 3686); Taim (CIS V 2555; Wh 711); Taur (SIJ 272); iy (CIS V 2795; 5089); TRM (Wh 587); Ubait (CIS ii 164; V 3262; Wh 1725a; PAAES iV 5,124; with Graf (1989a), p. 3601; Grushevoi (1985)); Wahabil (CIS V 74; Wh 1859 (Wahbil)); Waqaril (Wh 2036); Yanat (CIS V 4039); Yahud (CIS V 1270); Yaurr (CIS V 784; 2156; 4677); YR (Wh 2174); Zaid-l (PUAES iV c 461; SIJ 923). see Graf (1989a), p. 359. 119 Zeinaddin (2000), inscr. 6 with commentary. 120 e.g. hfy (aiite: CIS V 1341; ISB 424; Wh 1060); hrt (RT-ite: Wh 424 (?); 1236; 3658); (h)mkbly (MKBL-ite: Wh 400); hly (Aallites: Wh 3134); Ababite (ISB 155). see also the Greek Aooir (SEG XlViii 1949). 121 see e.g. macdonald (1993), p. 3534; macdonald (1995), p. 97; macdonald (2003b), p. 2789; van den branden (1966), p. 37. see also SEG XXXVi 1356; macdonald (1999), p. 260; Zein- addin (2000), p. 276. 254 Ulf scharrer tev Ooitgvev. 122 Grushevoi argues that the term ogo in Greek inscriptions from Transjordan is never used to refer to nomads, but exclusively with respect to city and village dwellers. from this he concludes that the Ubait at the beginning of the irst century ad had become sedentary and part of the community of s. 123
There does not seem to be further evidence in support of this hypothesis. The Ubait were clearly closely connected to buildings at s, 124 but their sedentarisa- tion does not follow necessarily: the Greek version of the inscription is defective, as the wrong form uaroixooogoovti (instead of the correct uaroixooog- oovto) shows. it thus might be that the writer of the inscription was not absolutely luent with Greek and its terminology. at least the bilingual shows that the Ubait were a social unit more than a clan or a family, and can be regarded rather as a tri- be. 125 in another bilingual inscription the safaitic term l is translated as ug . 126
There are also some Greek inscriptions mentioning tribes (ug ). 127 other Greek inscriptions use the form tev in connection with a personal in the genitive singular, 128 and it seems that these inscriptions rather refer to smaller social units such as families or clans. finally, names of groups in Greek inscriptions appear just in the plural form. 129 so far it is not clear to what extent all these groups may be regarded as nomads. 130 The last aspect leads to the question of ethnic hierarchies. it has become clear by now that these are hard to determine. however, there is sparse evidence that some groups ought to be set on a higher level than others. 131 Thus the Aw and the aif had an own Gad, which is mentioned quite frequently 132 and which could also be adored by members of other groups. 133 occasionally these two Gadde were ad- ored by one person, 134 which shows that both ethnic groups seem to have had at 122 CIS ii 164; PAAES iii 428a. The bilingual is also quoted fully by Grushevoi (1985), p. 52. 123 Grushevoi (1985), esp. p. 54, followed e.g. by contini (1987), p. 456; moors (1992), p. 343 n. 6. cf. Graf (1989a), p. 361. on the inscription see also millar (1993), p. 395. 124 see macdonald (2003b), p. 278. 125 see also cass. dio 51.7.1 on demoi and dynasts at the arabian gulf. cf. macdonald (2003b), p. 279. 126 SEG XlVi 1799,2: ug Xouvgvev. 127 e.g. Aschenoi (PUAES iii a 760); Bitaienoi: IGRR iii 1277; Chauchab: IGRR iii 1269 (see dussaud and macler (1901), p. 96, nr.263); Mozaidenoi (PUAES iii a 664); Osaisenoi: IGRR iii 1180; Somaithenoi: IGRR iii 1276; Somaithenoi or Bitaienoi: IGRR iii 1273. 128 e.g. PAAES iii 379: t[ev] Oooiou; 388: tev Boou. 129 e.g. IGRR iii 1132: Arisenoi and Iachphirenoi. 130 on Greek inscriptions see macadam (1983), p. 111. 131 see sartre (2005), p. 235. 132 Gadd-Aw CIS V 853; 857; 860; 893; 994; 1066; 1186; 1292; 1744; 1936; 1955; 2114; 2556; 2617; 2795; 3062; 3143; 4404; 4457; 4646; 4848; PAAES iV 125 (= PUAES iV c 348); PUAES iV c 306; 574; 640; 1198; 1214; SIJ 1008. see dussaud (1907), p. 14750; oxtoby (1968), p. 212. Gadd-aif: CIS V 2795; Wh 613; 1725b; SIJ 132; 9112. on the Gadd-Aw see littmann (1940), p. 108. on the Gad in general see dirven (1999), p. 101 and p. 1045. 133 Gadd-Aw: PAAES iV 125 (= PUAES iV c 348; CIS V 3263) (Udainath from the l of Nabar); CIS V 4646 (l of slimi); CIS V 4845 (l of Qamar). 134 CIS V 2446. 255 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east least some interaction. Tribal relationship is recorded in a safaitic inscription from Wadi rm, which commemorates a man, son of bahm, of the tribe uaim, son of a mother of the tribe aif, which means either that the uaim
were a branch of the aif or, rather, that there was an intertribal marriage. 135 Graf suggests that the Aw and the aif were tribal confederations, 136 but this is far from being certain, since, as stated above, l could design ethnic or familiy groups on different le- vels. 137 an inscription from the temple of bel at palmyra from ad 132 records the dedication of a certain obaid/abidu presenting himself as nabataean and ruhaean. 138 Whereas nothing is known about the ruhaeans, dijkstra interprets the term rwy as referring to the Raw known from safaitic inscriptions. 139 in this context it is suficient that the possibilities of different ethnic levels have been shown. finally there is the problem of the Thamd. for long it has been clear that wri- ters of the Thamudic inscriptions do not necessarily belong to the ethnic group of Thamd. 140 The Thamd have been known as an ethnic group since the eighth cen- tury bc. 141 in the second century bc agatharchides, quoted by diodorus and pho- tius, locates them in the north-east of the arabian Gulf, as ptolemy later does too. 142
pliny, probably drawing on iuba of mauretania, places the Thamd further inland and mentions a town (oppidum) called baclanaza in their territory. 143 besides the literary evidence, the name of the Thamd is mentioned in some inscriptions, e.g. a few safaitic texts referring to the Thamd
as l and some Thamudic texts. 144 apart from these very few traces actually not much is known about the Thamd in the period of the early roman empire. There even seems to be some sort of uncertainty whether the Thamd ought to be regarded as nomads or as a sedentary people. 145
some Thamudic inscriptions mention names of social or ethnic groups designated as hl or l. 146 it is not clear whether at least some of them might belong to the hig- her ethnic unit of the Thamd, and in most cases this is not very probable. 135 Zeinaddin (2000), inscr.16: mn bn bhm l m bn t l f. 136 Graf (1989a), p. 3634 and p. 366; Graf (1989b), p. 152. 137 on the problem of tribal confederations see schneider (2003a), p. 175. 138 Kaizer (2004a), p. 16970; (= CIS ii 3972; PAT 0319,2; PAAES iV 2,6,2; dijkstra (1995), p. 108): nby rwy[]. 139 dijkstra (1995), p. 1089. 140 caskel (1954), p. 39; Graf (1978), p. 112; Graf (1989a), p. 358; Graf (2002), p. 153; macdo- nald (1993), p. 335; sartre (2005), p. 234 and p. 237; DNP 12/ 1 (2002), col. 240 s.v. Thamu- disch (Kessler). see Zarins e.a. (1981), p. 36. on the distribution of Thamudic inscriptions see Graf (2002), p. 1556. 141 starcky [1956], p. 2012. see generally van den branden (1966). 142 diod. 3.44.6; phot. Bibl. 457. see Woelk (1966), p. 2213. ptol. Geogr. 6.7.21. 143 plin. HN 6.157. 144 safaitic texts: Wh 3792a; 3792c. see also Wh 1276. Thamudic texts: ITham hU172; hU637; dghty51; Jsa280; Jsa339. 145 Thamd as sedentary: ryckmans (1942), p. 132. as nomads: Van den branden (1966), p. 32. see the mentioning of a village (mdrt) in ITham hU712. 146 e.g. Ar (ITham dghty50,4); Badan (Winnett and reed (1970), p. 79 nr. 18, see also SIJ 87); -Ata (ITham Jsa409); Gaff (Winnett and reed (1970), p. 86 nr. 48a.); ha-Awal (ITham hU21); Harim (ITham Jsa450); aad (Winnett and reed (1970), p. 77 nr. 11); Hind (ITham 256 Ulf scharrer hardly any of the above-mentioned ethnic groups seem to have been noticed by Greek and roman authors, and this is probably the case because they were too small and not important enough. 147 apart from the Thamd there is one possible exception: eratosthenes, quoted by strabo, mentions the Chaulotaioi dwelling next to the nabataeans. 148 macdonald assumes that they may be identical with the awlat known from safaitic inscriptions. 149 if this is correct, this ethnic group apparently lost its possibly predominant position in the period from the third cen- tury bc to the irst century ad. as a third group, eratosthenes mentions the Agra- ioi, also noticed by pliny. 150 furthermore, strabo and pliny mention a great number of ethnic groups in the near east. some of these were clearly named by their city, 151
while others seem to be ethnic names. 152 a number of ethnic groups are mentioned around mt lebanon, 153 near the nabataean territory, 154 in northern mesopotamia, 155
in inner mesopotamia 156 and in southern mesopotamia and at the persian Gulf. 157 apart from the above-mentioned exception it is thus far impossible to correlate these ethnic names with any of the known inscriptions. furthermore, the same pro- blem of possible ethnic hierarchies arises as we have seen with respect to the we- stern semitic inscriptions: the terms r0vo, yrvo, natio, gens and even populus could be used throughout Greek and latin ethnography in different degrees. espe- cially the term r0vo has a wide range of meanings, e.g. an animal multitude and people, be it small or large units. 158 it has been proposed to translate the word as tribe, 159 as has been the practice for long in many translations, especially in the loeb series. There was apparently no clear concept behind the ancient use of all hU195); Humn (ITham hU260); abb (ITham Jsa607); amaiy (ITham hU498); ubbay (ITham hU565); I (Ph. 342g); Ilmana (ITham hU5); Maan-l (littmann (1940), nr. 139); Maay (ITham dgty16,3); Mag (ITham Jsa622 (?)); Namir (littmann (1940), nr. 123); Nimr (ITham .Jsa596); Nr (ITham hU740); Sabr (ITham eut156); Tinnat (ITham hU27); Wil (Ph. 370h); Zayyadu (ITham hU262). see also forms with the sufix -y: Aaite (Ph. 292w); Bbite (Ph. 292v); Nimrite (Ph. 363ac). 147 see Kuhnen (1991), p. 329. 148 strabo 16.4.2. 149 macdonald (2001), p. 252. on the awlat see e.g. PUAES iV c 344. 150 strabo 16.4.2; plin. HN 6.159. 151 strabo 16.2.2; plin. HN 5.812: e.g. the Gazetae, Hemeseni, Epiphanenses on the orontes, laodicaeans on the lebanon. 152 plin. HN 5.812: e.g. Ituraei, Granucomatitae, Penelenitae. 153 plin. HN 6.142: e.g. Nubei, Ramisi, Teranei, Patami. 154 plin. HN 6.157: e.g. Taveni, Suelleni, Araceni, Arreni, Hemnatae, Avalitae. 155 plin. HN 5.86: e.g. Praetavi (near carrhae), Rhoali (near Zeugma), 156 plin. HN 6.118: e.g. Eladamari, Salmani, Masei, Gurdaiaei, Azoni, Silices; strabo: e.g. Ely- maioi, Paraikatakenoi, see strabo 16.1.1; 16.1.1718. east of the Tigris esp. plin. HN 6.133: e.g. the Oxii; Mizaei; see strabo 15.3.12. 157 plin. HN 6.125: e.g. Attali: plin. HN 6.148: e.g. Nochaeti, Zurazi, Borgod, Catarrhei. 158 see e.g. Gschnitzer (2003), 4834; hutchinson and smith (1996), p. 4; Tonkin e.a. (1996), p. 1920; scharrer (2002c), p. 168, with further references; Ulf (1996), p. 2408. see also e.g. on old persian dahyu- briant (2001), p. 118; scharrer (2002c), p. 173 n. 22, with further refe- rences. on indian brahmans as ethnos see diod. 17.102.7. 159 Tonkin e.a. (1996), p. 20; see also Gschnitzer (2003), p. 4703. 257 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east these terms and they appear to be rather interchangable. 160 finally, it remains unclear to what extent at least some of the peoples mentioned by strabo and pliny may be regarded as nomads. Unfortunately strabo and pliny give hardly any ethnic name when they mention nomades and scenitae, which might indicate that nomadic peoples at the beginning of roman rule in the near east were dispersed in many rather small groups which may have constituted something like a segmentary soci- ety. There are only a few exceptions. one of these are the Catarrhei at the persian Gulf, who are explicitly termed as nomades by pliny. 161 in addition, strabo says that the mesopotamian Paraikatenoi were more interested in agriculture than other peoples, 162 which might indicate that many other peoples had other ways of life, among which were probably nomadic modes. by the second half of the second century ad the ethnic situation in the near east seems to have changed to a considerable degree. This is indicated by ptole- mys lists in the ifth and sixth books of his Geography naming peoples which mostly cannot be identiied with any of those named by strabo or pliny. 163 The sec- ond and the early years of the third centuries ad in fact saw the migrations of large tribal confederations from south and middle arabia into the spheres of roman and persian inluence. by far the most important of these are clearly the Tankh. The most important source on this confederation is abar whose account is basically followed in modern scholarship. according to abar different tribes of the bahrain united and decided to form a confederation under the name of Tankh. Towards the end of the period of parthian power this confederation moved northwards to the iraq. 164 according to abar at this time also other arab groups moved to the iraq. 165
eventually, abar relates, the Tankh and other groups settled at al-rah, and thus al-rah had three elements of population, its original population, the Tankh and the alf. 166 as the name Alf (confederation) indicates, this group was consti- tuted by different tribal groups which apparently did not belong to the Tankh con- federation. apparently not all Tankh and other groups settled at al-rah itself. abar records that the numrah, a tribe apparently allied to the Tankh, settled at nippur in the realm of the former kingdom of the armn. 167 according to abar the 160 see isaac (1998c), p. 2645; Gschnitzer (2003), p. 4834. There are countless examples in ancient literature. see e.g. curtius 6.6.36; 7.3.5; plin. HN 5.3637; 5.146; Vell. pat. 2.38.1 39.2; 40.12. 161 plin. HN 6.148. 162 strabo 16.1.18. 163 see potts (1990), p. 222 and p. 2267. 164 abar, Tarkh (History) i 7459. see ball (2000), p. 978; bowersock (1983), p. 1323; bo- wersock (1994c), p. 1278; brentjes (1970), p. 323; equini schneider (1993), p. 467; hart- mann (2001), p. 3415; hoyland (2001), p. 2323; potts (1990), p. 2234; rothstein (1899), p. 2932; shahd (1984a), p. 36972. on different accounts of islamic authors see EIs 9 (1927), p. 2278, s.v. Tankh (Kindermann); rothstein (1899), p. 29. 165 abar, Tarkh (History) i 822. see also abar, Tarkh (History) i 744 on earlier movements. on the Tankh in ptolemy see e.g. potts (1990), p. 222. 166 abar, Tarkh (History) i 822. see altheim and stiehl (196469) i, p. 269. 167 abar, Tarkh (History) i 749. 258 Ulf scharrer Tankh dwelled in tents, living mainly in the euphrates region. 168 from this it may be concluded that they led a nomadic, if not bedouin life. The character of the sett- lement of al-rah remains unclear. its name, meaning camp, 169 implies that it originally was not a fully built settlement, but that at least large parts of it were tents. The outer appearance of al-rah in the period covered here cannot be traced reasonably. however, in scholarship the site is regarded as having become the main political, social and probably also religious centre of Tankh power. 170 abar continues that at the sasanid conquest of the iraq a group of the Tankh, the Quah, moved to syria and united with another branch of the Quah which were already there. 171 This westward orientation of segments of the Tankh is re- lected probably in the famous Greek-nabataean epitaph for fihr, the tutor (to- ru / rbw) of the lakhmid ruler Gadhima, dated to ca ad 270, from Umm al- Jeml in the southern hauran, and in the inscription of imraalqays from namra dated to ad 328. 172 Thus far many points have to remain unclear: to what extent and how were tribes of the safaitic and Thamudic inscriptions integrated into the Tankh domi- nion, or did some of them become absorbed during this process? 173 To what extent was force involved? how was the power of the ruling dynasty, the lakhmids, or- ganised? some of these questions will be discussed below in the ifth section. ho- wever, so far the process of ethnic change cannot be traced conclusively. at least this process must have been considerable, as it is relected by the very different ethnic groups given by earlier and later Graeco-roman authors. The Tankh hegemony under the lakhmids has been characterised as a dimor- phic structure, since the centre of political, social and religious life is said to have been al-rah, and nomadic elements thus seem to have had close connections to a 168 abar, Tarkh (History) i 74950; 822. see caskel (1954), p. 42. 169 bowersock (1994c), p. 133; shahd (1984b), p. 4908. 170 see bowersock (1975), p. 521; caskel (1954), p. 44; luther (1997), p. 189; potts (1990), p. 236; rothstein (1899), esp. p. 127. probably al-rah is to be identiied with the city ske- nai, said to be in persia (steph. byz. s.v. Exgvoi). This reference might also be taken as relating to the persian realm, i.e. the euphrates region. on skenai see altheim and stiehl (196469) i, p. 2712; scharrer (2002c), p. 1989. 171 abar, Tarkh (History) i 821. see hoyland (2001), p. 234. on Tankh migrating westwards at the rise of sasanid power see altheim and stiehl (196469) ii, p. 2512; bowersock (1975), p. 521; bowersock (1994c), 1278; chapot (1907), p. 29; Graf (1989b), p. 150; hartmann (2001), p. 346. 172 The epitaph for fihr, nabataean section: PUAES iV a 41; CIS ii 192; Greek section: PUAES iii a 238 1 ; SEG XXiX 1604. on the inscription see de Vries (1986), p. 237; equini schneider (1993), p. 46; moors (1992), p. 3089; peters (1978), p. 3245. The namra-inscription of imrualqays: ed. and comm. by dussaud (1902); dussaud (1907), p. 345; bellamy (1985). on the inscription see also bowersock (1983), p. 1389; dussaud (1955), p. 645; isaac (1992), p. 23940; millar (1993), p. 4345; moors (1992), p. 3078; shahd (1984a), p. 3153, p. 5112 and p. 567; Zwettler (1993). on the inscription see also below, n.2347, n. 48891 and n. 4934. see generally bowersock (1975), p. 521; Graf (1989a), p. 37980. 173 e.g. Villeneneuve (1989), p. 138. Graf (1989b), p. 1589 states that with Zenobias defeat the safaitic inscriptions came to an end. With respect to mesopotamia it seems that indigenous tribes became absorbed: see abar, Tarkh (History) i 748. 259 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east city. 174 The question is how intense these connections were. so far no conclusive statement can be made, and it seems more appropriate to apply the concept of seg- mentary societies to the problem: accordingly, different segments of the Tankh confederation dwelled in diverse regions of the near east, probably with rather loose ties to al-rah, and this may be relected in the movements westwards scatched above. in this context it is also debatable to what extent the emergence of the term saracen stands in connection with the arrival of the new ethnic and predominantly nomadic groups. ptolemy lists an ethnic group of Sarakenoi in direct neigbourhood to the Thamd, both living in the hejaz, 175 and he mentions the Sarakene, a desert in the south of the sinai. 176 in the course of the second and especially the third cen- turies ad the term Saraceni became predominant in the naming and description of arab peoples by Greek and latin authors, and in mediaeval europe arabs generally were termed as Saraceni. 177 in scholarship, however, the origin and development of the term is debated. already pliny mentions the Araceni adjoining the naba- taeans, which sometimes is regarded as an early reference to the Saraceni. 178 an inluential explanation is based on the famous Greek-nabataean inscripton from rawwfa in the hejaz, dating from ad 16769. 179 The inscription states that a temple was built by the Thamd, explicitly in Greek to tev Ooouogvev r0vo (a2/c5a) and in nabataean rkt tmwdw (b4). Graf and oconnor suggest that rkt means confederation, and from this word the ethnographic term Saraceni is said to be derived: since many other arab groups formed similar confederations, the word was taken over as a general ethnographic term for arabs. 180 This view has been challenged especially by shahd, who argues that rkt, otherwise unknown for 174 see Zwettler (1993), p. 112. on the concept of dimorphic societies see above, n. 41. 175 ptol. Geog. 6.7.21. 176 ptol. Geog. 5.16.3. see steph. byz. s.v. Eooxo. see also suda s.v. Eooxgvoi just saying, that the saracens are an r0vo. There is not much value in this information. see bowersock (1994e), p. 386; Graf and oconnor (1977), p. 57. 177 see rotter (1986), p. 68; 105. 178 plin. HN 6.157. see e.g. EIs 7 (1927), p. 155 s.v. Saracens (mordtmann); DNP 11 (2001), col. 52 s.v. Saraceni (Kuhnen); RE ii 2 (1920), col. 2388 s.v. Eooxo (moritz); bowersock (1994e), p. 386; Graf and oconnor (1977), p. 57. see the remark of eusebius, Onomastikon p. 118 (ed. Klostermann), according to which Qedar is the region of the saracens. 179 The inscription is published by Graf (1978), p. 910; bowersock (1975), p. 5145 (= dijkstra (1995), p. 78); altheim and stiehl (19649) V/2, p. 247 (bowersock (1975), p. 514: a disa- ster). on the date of the inscription see bowersock (1975), p. 515; briquel-chatonnet (1995b), p. 137; Graf (1978), p. 10; sartre (1982a), p. 28; sartre (1991), p. 334. on the inscription and the history of scholarship see altheim and stiehl (196469) V/2, p. 24; bowersock (1994b), p. 1145; bowersock (1975), p. 5134; bowersock (1983), p. 967; dijkstra (1995), p. 7780; Graf (1978), p. 9; Graf and oconnor (1977), p. 556; sartre (1982a), p. 279. 180 Graf and oconnor (1977); Graf (1978), p. 15; Graf (1989a), p. 354; oconnor (1986), p. 604 5, followed by bowersock (1983), p. 97; bowersock (1986), p. 113; bowersock (1994c), p. 127; bowersock (1994e), p. 386; Kennedy and riley (1990), p. 38; Kuhnen (1991), p. 329; sartre (1991), p. 334; Whittaker (1994), p. 1356. see also briant (1982), p. 1478; Gebhardt (2002), p. 100 n. 5. cf. DNP 11 (2001), col. 52 s.v. Saraka (Toral-niehoff); shahd (1984b), p. 12831. 260 Ulf scharrer arab peoples, does not mean confederation, since in this case the Greek transla- tion would have been ouoio, and thus rkt denotes simply a tribe or a people. 181
he suggests to refer to ptolemy, who is the irst to mention the Sarakenoi, from which the general term is derived. 182 other important explanations for example re- gard rq (= east) as the etymological basis of the word. 183 finally, macdonald stresses an afinity to the arab word sharqiye, which means the annual movement into the desert. according to the latter views the words rkt
and Saraceni are not related etymologically. 184 Whether originally the name of a however deined ethnic group or not, as used by Greek and latin authors the term Saraceni eventually became, as indicated above, a collective name of different ethnic groups. 185 latin etymology derives the name from the scenitae, which is most explicitly stated in some passages of am- mianus marcellinus. 186 in his famous ethnography of the saracens he describes them as warlike men having equal ranks, who do not live from any agriculture, but move around. 187 it is obvious that in this period the term Saraceni basically names nomadic peoples. 188 remarkable in this context is a passage in the Historia Augu- sta, which apparently makes a distinction between arabs and saracens. 189 This might indicate that Arabs, at least in this passage, could be regarded as rather se- dentary populations in contrast to the nomadic Saracens, and this clearly supports the above-quoted view of macdonald. let us return briely to the rawwfa inscription. With respect to the Thamd it is debatable what the term r0vo actually implies: if it is regarded as designating an 181 shahd (1984b), p. 13840. against this etymology see also macadam (1989), p. 308; macdo- nald (1995), p. 968. 182 shahd (1984b), p. 12937. similar millar (1993), p. 140. according to macadam (1989), p. 308 this may have been coincidence. 183 KlP, p. 1548 s.v. Saraka (dietrich); RE ii 2 (1920), col. 2389 s.v. Eooxo (moritz). see bo- wersock (1994e), p. 386; DNP 11 (2001) col. 52 s.v. Saraka (Toral-niehoff). against this ety- mology see macdonald (2001), p. 254. on other etymologies see Graf and oconnor (1977), p. 614; macdonald (1995), p. 946; shahd (1984b), p. 1237. 184 macdonald (1995), p. 945; macdonald (2001), p. 2545. 185 similar was the view of european medieaeval authors on preislamic saracens: see rotter (1986), p. 105. see also euseb. Chron. 24.14: Abraham ex ancilla Agar generat Ismahel, a quo Ismahelitarum genus, qui postea Agareni et ad postremum Saraceni dicti. on the syriac ayye see luther (1997), p. 146. 186 amm. marc. 22.15.1; 23.6.13. on sources see Graf (1978), p. 145. see also shahd (1984a), p. 23040; 279. 187 amm. marc. 14.4. amm. marc. 14.4.2 states that he already described the saracens in his now lost history on marcus aurelius. probably the term Saracen was used there anachronisti- cally. on ammianus marcellinus and the saracens see e.g. bowersock (1994e), p. 385; Graf (1989a), p. 3546; Graf and oconnor (1977), p. 589; parker (1986a), p. 144; parker (2002), p. 79; seyfarth (1968); shahd (1984a), p. 23968. 188 see altheim and stiehl (196469) ii, p. 73; bowersock (1994c), p. 1267; bowersock (1994e), p. 3857; christides (1972), p. 332; Graf (1989a), p. 354; isaac (1998d), p. 278; macdonald (1995), p. 93; mayerson (1986), p. 36; mayerson (1988), p. 71; mayerson (1994a), p. 283 and p. 291; seyfarth (1968); shahd (1984a), p. 240; 279; shahd (1984b), p. 2930. 189 sha Tyr. Trig. 30.7. see also festus, Breviarium 3; 16. see bowersock (1994e), p. 388. cf. eadie (1967), p. 77. 261 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east ethnic group, then the name of the Thamd seems to be on a higher level than others, which is evidenced by the inscriptions d (nabataean) and e (Greek) from the temple of rawwfa. 190 The nabataean section mentions that the temple was built by adat from the rubau, the latter without the term l. The Greek section, however, states cicOioi O[o]ouogvev ug Poo0ou oixooogoo to rigov touto (the Sisthioi of the Thamudenoi, of the tribe Rhobathos, built this sanc- tuary). Whereas the Sisthioi remain enigmatic, 191 it is apparent that there were many tribes which belonged to the Thamd. 192 The nabataean section b4 records that the leaders (qdmy) of the rkt had built the temple. it is thus plausible to as- sume that the Thamd formed an ethnic group on a higher level, probably a confe- deration, with many ethnic subgroups on the lower level. 193 however, it has been argued by macdonald that r0vo in this contexts means some sort of a military unit, 194 and if that is correct not much can be derived from the inscription about the Thamd as an ethnic group. it has been argued that the Thamd were absorbed by the saracens, since after the rawwfa-inscription they do not igure in any records of the history of the ro- man near east. 195 indeed, abar relates that Tankh groups under the leadership of d destroyed the Thamd. 196 apparently the Qurn repeatedly narrates the de- struction of the Thamd on behalf of their sins against the camel of allh sent to them by the prophet li some time before the rise of islam. 197 in the present con- text more important is the question to what extent the Thamd of the rawwfa- inscription are to be regarded as nomadic. a nomadic way of life has been assumed repeatedly in modern scholarship, 198 but so far there is no direct evidence for this. While it can basically be assumed that there were both more nomadic and more sedentary segments of the Thamd, there is a hint in the Notitia Dignitatum mentio- ning Equites Saraceni Thamudeni in egypt. 199 apparently the Thamd of the unit are designated as Saraceni, and if it is right that the term Saraceni primarily desi- gnates nomads, the unit was recruited among nomadic segments of the Thamd. To what extent the Equites Thamudeni Illyriciani mentioned in the Notitia as being stationed in palestine 200 were recruited from rather sedentary groups is a matter of 190 published e.g. in Graf (1978), p. 10. 191 cf. Graf (1978), p. 10. 192 see van den branden (1966), p. 23. 193 Graf (1978), p. 112. sartre (1982a), p. 28 translates tribu. see sartre (1982a), p. 130. 194 macdonald (1995), p. 99100, followed by sartre (2005), p. 237. 195 Kuhnen (1991), p. 329. 196 abar, Tarkh (History) i 748. 197 Qurn 7.7176 (destruction by an earthquake (rajfa)); 41.12, 41.16, 51.4345, 69.5 (destruc- tion by a thunderbolt (iqa)). on the total destruction of the Thamd see also Qurn 11.64 71; 25.4041; 26.141158; 40.32; 53.52; 91.1114. on the sins of the Thamd see also Qurn 9.71; 17.61; 22.43. see also paret (1980), p. 1645; EIs 8 (1927), p. 736 s.v. Thamd (bru); EIs 7 (1927), p. 1078 s.v. li (bruhl). 198 Graf (1978), p. 12; Kennedy (2004), p. 41; sartre (1997), p. 316; starcky [1956], p. 201; Woelk (1966), p. 222. 199 Not. Dign. [or.] 28.17. see shahd (1984b), p. 2930. 200 Not. Dign. [or.] 34.22. see shahd (1984b), p. 2930. 262 Ulf scharrer debate. however, the problems involved with military recruitment shall be dis- cussed below in the third part of the ifth section. The emergence of the term Saraceni is in close connection with the process of bedouinization of near eastern societies that is commonly assumed in scholarship as having begun in the third century ad. 201 it has to be noted, however, that this bedouinization is a modern construct for which there is no direct evidence. There are different explanations for a bedouinization in the roman near east. obviously most commonly stated is the development of the camel saddle, which is said to have allowed an expanded use of the camel especially in ighting. 202 other explana- tions ind the reasons for a bedouinization in roman rule itself, 203 or in its wea- kness which attracted tribes from southern and middle arabia to migrate nor- thward. 204 The supposed decline of trade after the fall of palmyra has also been re- garded as a reason for bedouinization, 205 and inally the fall of client states in gene- ral is sometimes given as an important reason, since in consequence local control of nomadic groups is said to have ceased. 206 in the context of the question of bedouinization it is noticeable that with the Tankh apparently a new and substantial nomadic population element came into the sphere of persian and roman inluence. it is remarkable that the arrival of rather nomadic groups coincides more or less with the expanded use of the term Saracen in Greek and latin texts. apparently the term was applied also to Tankh groups: abar writes that Tankh fought on aurelians side against Zenobia. in the Histo- ria Augusta it is said that saracens fought on the roman side against palmyra. 207 at least there seems to be an interdependency between the migrations of ethnic groups, a nomadization and the use of the term Saraceni. finally, the aspect of the term Arab in Greek and latin texts on the one hand and in indigenous sources on the other needs to be discussed. 208 as it does not need to be emphasized here, the term has a long history: it already appears in assyrian 201 altheim and stiehl (1972); bernbeck (1993), p. 1678 (on the whole a rather obscure book!); bulliet (1975), p. 87104; caskel (1953), p. 8; Graf (1989a), p. 3923; Kuhnen (1991); parker (1990), p. 223; scholz (1995), p. 489; Whittaker (1994), p. 135. cf. Khazanov (1994), p. 101; oxtoby (1968), p. 1920. Villeneuve (1989), p. 120 assumes the beginning of a bedouinisation in the ifth and sixth century ad. Kennedy and riley (1990), p. 37 assume a bedouinization already beginning in the second century ad, which is not to be exaggerated. sceptical about the concept of bedouinization: lancaster and lancaster (1988). 202 bulliet (1975), p. 87104; caskel (1954); Kuhnen (1991); staubli (1991), p. 198. 203 caskel (1953), p. 8; scholz (1995), p. 489. 204 parker (1990), p. 223. 205 bulliet (1975), p. 104; parker (1986), p. 642; sommer (2003a), p. 43. see butcher (2003), p. 64. 206 caskel (1954), p. 3940. some scholars argue that after the fall of some client states the popu- lation became nomadic: on hatra: bernbeck (1993), p. 1678. on palmyra: Graf (1989a), p. 3923; matthews (1984), p. 169; shahd (1984b), p. 24. on the nabataean kingdom see cameron (1993), p. 194; Taeschner (1964), p. 301. see also the criticism of caskel by Graf (1989a), p. 3923. 207 sha Aurel. 28.2. 208 on the discussion see rets (2003), p. 10518. on the arabian terminolgy see orthmann (2002), p. 14150. 263 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east texts since the ninth century bc and is found in babylonian texts up to the early parthian period and in the Hebrew Bible. 209 The problem of the etymology is not solved yet. according to some views it is related to the hebrew word {ar~b~h (= desert) and thus designates those living in the desert. 210 it thus appears to be a term applied by others, i.e. sedentary people, to the relevant groups. according to ano- ther view the hebrew word does not provide a suficient etymological basis, as a similar word is not known from akkadian or old arabian. it was thus originally a native term of nomads themselves. 211 also discussed is the use of the term in Greek and latin authors. Whereas it is often stated that the term implies nomads generally, 212 other approaches are more distinctive. With respect mainly to Greek authors up to the period of alexander the Great, macdonald states that Arabia was primarily a geographic term. The term Arabs was used for different groups with different ways of life whose common factor was linguistic. Thus the term could be applied both to nomadic and sedentary populations. 213 This view is supplemented by the apparent distinction between arabs and nomads made by Greek and roman authors. Thus, strabo and pliny repeatedly mention Arabes scenitae, 214 which dis- tinguishes these groups from other arabs. furthermore a passage in strabo explic- itly makes a distinction between skenitai and Arabs. 215 The nomadic arabs can be contrasted to sedentary or agricultral arabs who are occasionally referred to in lit- erary sources. 216 in addition, some hellenistic Greek inscriptions, each mentioning an arab (Ao) at rhodos, delos and athens, seem to remark on the ethnic origin of these persons rather than their way of living. 217 furthermore, Greek papyri from ptolemaic egypt mention arabian villages and towns, 218 thus implying a sedentary way of life of their inhabitants. finally, the surname of philippus arabs emphasized the emperors ethnic and geographic origin rather than an earlier nomadism. Thus the use of the word arab in Greek and latin sources does not at all necessarily imply nomadic peoples. 209 see briant (1982), p. 1139; ephal (1982); KlP, col. 483 s.v. Arabia (Thomasson); RE II 1 (1895), col. 344 s.v. Arabia (mller); Zwettler (1993), p. 21 n. 21. arabs are mentioned occa- sionally in the Babylonian Astronomical Diaries: sachs and hunger iii (1996), 329, rs. 2; 125a vs. 21; 124b rs. 20 (= schuol (2000), p. 37 and p. 39 respectively). 210 altheim and stiehl (1972), p. 2968; briant (1982), p. 114; ephal (1982), p. 7; healey (1989), p. 40; RE II 1 (1895), col. 344 s.v. Arabia (mller); EIMW, p. 51 s.v. Arabia (newby). see also Tohme (2000), p. 112. 211 ephal (1982), p. 7. see macdonald (2001), p. 232. 212 ball (2000), p. 32; levi (1989), p. 34; millar (1993), p. 221; sommer (2003a), p. 22; sommer (2005), p. 58, stating that the term is not used homogenously for nomadic, but sometimes also for sedentary arabs; Villeneuve (1989), p. 124 n. 3. Using the term arabs in the sense of no- mads: schmitt (2005), p. 4223. 213 dillemann (1962), p. 889; macdonald (2001), p. 2313, p. 2478 and p. 2512; ross (2001), p. 165 n. 25. on the term in early islamic texts see rets (2003), p. 2495. 214 plin. HN 5.87; strabo 16.1.8; 16.1.26; 16.3.1. see also CIL iii 128. 215 strabo 16.2.11. see chapot (1907), p. 27. 216 e.g. curtius 4.2.24. see macadam (1989), p. 2978. 217 SEG iii 674,34; 523; baslez (1977), p. 101; p. 361; bruneau (1970), p. 4778; IG 2 ii=2 83618362. see also IGRR i 839 from the roman period. 218 e.g. P. Enteuxeis 3,1; 47,1; S.B. 11307,56. 264 Ulf scharrer in this context shahd states that Greek and roman authors referred to arabs as a collective ethnic term, which comprehends many single ethnic groups. 219 accor- ding to an early Greek tradition established by stesichorus and hesiod, arabs stem from a certain arabus, son of hermes and on his mothers side grandson of be- lus. 220 The naming of an ancestor of large ethnic units, whose descendants themsel- ves are regarded as the ancestors of ethnic subunits on different levels, is an ethno- graphic habit common both to ancient western and eastern consciousness of ethnic identity. The term arab accordingly could be used by Greek and roman authors for the inhabitants of Arabia, which is deined geographically, and as an ethnic term. however, a certain lifestyle is not implied. 221 more problematic are the references to rb in semitic inscriptions and docu- mentary sources. above the early history of the term is sketched very briely. docu- ments from the roman near east, however, are currently interpreted ambiguously. from the second century ad onwards, the word and its terminological ield begins to be used frequently in documents from hatra, osrhoene and occasionally else- where. at hatra the terms lord of the arabs (mr rby), majordomo of the arabs (rbyt dy rb) and king of the arabs (mlk rby) are frequently attested, as well as other mentions of Arab. 222 similarily some inscriptions from sumatar in the os- rhoene mention a governor of Arab. 223 it is possible that the syriac term corre- sponds to the Greek ooor, mentioned in a papyrus from ad 121, which was found in dura-europus, but written originally in paliga. 224 arabia here is a region outside the durene territory, since two other papyri from dura-europus refer to europus toward arabia. 225 furthermore an inscription from the Wadi mukkatep on the sinai mentions arabs, 226 and inally the famous inscription from namra entitles maralqays/imraalqays as king of (all) Arab. 227 in the context of this section it ought to be discussed what could be meant by the term rb, since there 219 shahd (1984b), p. 6. see pollard (2000), p. 1123. on the question of an arabic ethnicity see von Grunebaum (1963). 220 strabo 1.2.34. RE ii 1 (1895), col. 350 s.v. Arabia (mller). on similar ethnic etymologies see scharrer (2002c), p. 194. see furthermore on ethymologies of Arabs and Arabia in Greek sour- ces christides (1972), p. 32931. 221 see peters (1999a), p. xiv; rets (2003), p. 112. see e.g. plin. HN 5.86 and 6.136 on arabian oppida. see also proc. bell. 1.19.20. 222 lord of the arabs: H78; majordomo of the arabs: H223,2 (= dijkstra (1995), p. 3; 228); H364,2; king of the arabs: H193,2; H194,12; H195,12 (= dijkstra (1995), p. 228); H196 (?); H197,2; 4; H198,23; H199,23; H203,12; H287,45 (= dijkstra (1995), p. 2301); H290,2 (= dijkstra (1995), p. 2023); H342 (= Kaizer (2006b), p. 1434), 12 (?);H345,2; H347,2; H353,2; H370; H373; H375; H379; H1020,5; other mentions: H79,10; 14; H288,d1; H336 (= Kaizer (2006b), p. 1423), 5; H343 (= Kaizer (2006b), p. 1445), 3 (= dijkstra (1995), p. 183); H025,3. on inscriptions from hatra see e.g. drijvers (1977), p. 8204. 223 drijvers and healey (1999), as36,1; as47,3; as49,23; as51,1; as52,4; add3,3: ly drb. 224 PDura 20,5. on the document in general see dirven (1999), p. 297; millar (1993), p. 4478, p. 479 and p. 489; segal (1970), p. 19 and p. 22. The document is also republished fully in sommer (2005), p. 296 n. 54. 225 PDura 22,3; 25,17: rv Eueae tg ao Aoio. 226 NSI 107. The reading, however, is dubious. see e.g. Graf (1989a), p. 3445. 227 Line 1: mlk lrb (klh). on the inscription see n. 172. 265 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east seem to be some discrepancies about this matter in current scholarship. most often it is stated that the term refers to the steppe and its nomadic inhabitants, 228 and that the title of an arabarches refers to an ofice relating to nomadic steppe-dwellers. 229
according to the second view the ofice relates to steppe dwellers, be it nomadic or sedentary, i.e. villagers. 230 accordingly also the Arab of the hatrean inscriptions are regarded as the steppe and its nomadic inhabitants 231 or as its nomadic and se- dentary dwellers, as there are archaelogical traces of sedentary settlements also in the steppe. 232 in both cases the second view appears thus to be more likely, and accordingly there is a difference between the term Arab in Greek and latin literary sources and in the near eastern documents, the irst using the word as an ethnogra- phic name, the second as a term for people dwelling in the steppe. it is quite pro- bable that often nomadic arabs are meant, as for example the mishnah speaks of tents of arabs. 233 however, it was not necessarily a nomadic way of life that seems to be implied by the documents just quoted. not only in this context the reading and interpretation of the funerary inscrip- tion for imraalqays from namra in the eastern hauran is controversial. in the inscription, the name is given as Maralqays bar Amr, but he is generally identi- ied with the lakhmid king imraalqays ibn amr ibn ady, known for example from abar, and thus the inscription is dated to ad 328. 234 it ought to be briely reconsidered here what the title of king of (all?) Arab implies. The reading is not clear because of the erosion of the surface. 235 at the end of the opening phrase it is debatable whether its wording is klh (all) or [w]lqbh (and his title of honour is). 236 although after a second scrutiny on the stone he accepts the original reading 228 aggoula (1975), p. 197203; ephal (1982), p. 68; dostal (1989), p. 423; Gawlikowski (1995b), p. 87, followed by Kaizer (2002), p. 57; Kaizer (2003a), p. 286; millar (1993), p. 448; sommer (2003a), p. 23; p. 38; Teixidor (1964), p. 283; Vattioni (1994), p. 5; p. 49; Wiesehfer (1982), p. 440. see also the relevant translations of the hatraean inscriptions by beyer, accor- ding to which bedouins (bedouinen) were implied. cf. sartre (1989), p. 141. 229 drijvers and healey (1999), p. 37; p. 105; Gawlikowski (1995b), p. 87; millar (1993), p. 450; sommer (2003a), p. 22; sommer (2005), p. 255; Teixidor (1964), p. 283; Tubach (1986), p. 15. 230 ross (2001), p. 25; segal (1970), p. 22; Zwettler (1993), p. 10. also aggoula (1995), p. 75; dijkstra (1995), p. 253. 231 altheim and stiehl (196469) iV, p. 26971; dijkstra (1990), p. 956; Vattioni (1994), p. 56 and p. 49. see also luther (1997), p. 173; sommer (2003a), p. 38; Zwettler (1993), p. 89. on the steppe around hatra see e.g. cass. dio 68.31.1. 232 hauser (1998), p. 5123; hauser (2000), p. 1913. also aggoula (1995), p. 745; Kaizer (2006b), p. 143 and p. 153; Zwettler (1993), p. 12. on the syriac distinction between arabye as inhabitants of the provincia arabia and arabye, who lived in the steppe see luther (1997), p. 205. see furthermore orthmann (2002), p. 143. 233 Mishnah VI. Seder. oharot: 2. Ohalot 18.10. 234 on editions and commentaries see n.172. on the identiication and the date see furthermore altheim and stiehl (196469) iV, p. 34; bellamy (1985), p. 31; bowersock (1975), p. 520; bowersock (1983), p. 134; bowersock (1986), p. 1134; isaac (1998b), p. 125; parker (1986b), p. 642; shahd (1984a), p. 32; shahd (1984b), p. 31 n. 38; Zwettler (1993), p. 12. on im- raalqays see e.g. abar, Tarkh (History) i 834; 845; bowersock (1983), p. 13846. 235 see Zwettler (1993), p. 5 with pl.iiii. 236 on the discussion see dignas and Winter (2001), p. 1989; Zwettler (1993), p. 156. see bel- lamy (1985), p. 356. 266 Ulf scharrer by dussaud as klh, Zwettler argues with respect to the inscriptions from hatra that not all Arab in the sense of all arabs could be meant, since the inscription na- mes only four or ive tribes ruled by imraalqays. he thus interprets Arab rather as the entire region over which imraalqays claims to have ruled, without respect to a certain way of life, be it nomadic or sedentary. 237 in fact, namra was an important place for the tribes of the safaitic inscriptions. 238 if these inscriptions continued to be written into the fourth century ad or even later, their writers certainly falled somehow under the goverment of the lakhmid king 239 , as well as maybe the Thamd of the rawwfa-inscription. 240 Generally, then, there emerges one problem: if we speak of nomadic allies, it is in most cases hard to identify them. This problem has two aspects. The irst aspect lies in the dificulty that it is not always clear whether indeed all relevant groups should be regarded as nomads, not to speak of bedouins. The second aspect is even more complicated: if we ind nomadic allies, it is impossible in most cases to iden- tify clearly deined ethnic groups, as nomadic society appears to be split in many segments on different levels. it would be a great task to compile an ethnographic inventory of the roman near east which eventually might lead to an ethnographic history, 241 but this of course cannot be undertaken here. nomad-sedenTarY relaTions: anTaGonism and sYmbiosis i shall now turn to the ield of nomad-sedentary relations. i shall, however, exclude political relations, as these are the topic of the next section. here, i shall irst dis- cuss the topic of conlict, and afterwards some forms of symbiosis between no- madic and sedentary populations in the roman near east. at the end of the irst section i mentioned raiding as an economic strategy of nomadic groups to gain goods they could not produce by themselves. in fact, nomadic aggression is a topos which is to be found throughout the centuries in records produced by sedentary populations, from akkadian texts up to the present day. 242 in this context it has long been discussed to what degree nomads should be regarded as a threat to sedentary populations within the sphere of the eastern roman empire and to the empire it- self. 243 With modiications, there are basically four positions taken. according to 237 Zwettler (1993). see already bowersock (1975), p. 520. see the reading of dussaud (1902), p. 4123. see furthermore Weerakkody (2000), p. 113. 238 dussaud (1955), p. 138. safaitic inscriptions from namra or mentioning it: e.g. PAAES iV 5,2; CIS V 241; 523; 1656; 18945; 2732; 2803; 3143; 322348; 3878; PUAES iV c 330; 4067; 426; 532; 539; 675; 1013; ingholt and starcky (1951), nr. 81b. 239 see shahd (1984b), p. 31 n. 38. cf. Knauf (1991), p. 97. 240 see bowersock (1975), p. 522. 241 see SEG XlViii 1909; pollard (2000), p. 171211. 242 Graf (1989a), p. 3512; 354; leder (2005), p. 21; marx (1992), p. 258. see scharrer (2002b), p. 299300. on Greek and latin texts: beyer (1998), p. 198 n. 89; sartre (1991), p. 332 (= sartre (1997), p. 3156); see scharrer (2004), p. 3112. 243 on the discussion see Gebhardt (2002), p. 90 n. 1; Graf (1989a), p. 344 n. 8; sartre [1990], p. 501; staubli (1991), p. 78; Whittaker (1994), p. 137. 267 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east the irst view there was a considerable nomadic threat throughout the period cov- ered here. 244 The second position taken is that nomads in the irst centuries of ro- man rule did not constitute a menace, but that by the third century the nomadic threat became serious. 245 The adherents to the third position suggest that nomads did actually not constitute a menace, 246 and in this context they sometimes empha- sise a mutual relationship between the nomad and the sedentary spheres. 247 follow- ers of the fourth position argue that a distinction is to be made between relations on a macro- and a micro level. according to this position there could have been con- licts on the large scale, but on the small scale there could have been peaceful inter- action too. 248
a central issue within this discussion is the function of the different limites in the roman near east i.e. the Limes Palaestinae in the negev, the Limes Arabicus, the Via Nova Traiana and the Strata Diocletiana. 249 The interpretation of the func- tion of these fortiications depends on the view towards the question of the weight of nomadic threats. according to the irst view a main purpose of the military in- stallations was to keep nomads out. 250 Within this ield of arguments, the fortiica- tions themselves are put forward in favour of a considerable nomadic threat. The argument, in short, runs as follows: if there are fortiications towards the steppe and the desert there must have been a threat by desert peoples. 251 The adherents to the view that there was no considerable nomadic threat argue that the function of a ro- man limes was not primarily the defence against a large scale attack from beyond the frontier, but to monitor movements, in the present context nomadic movements. 244 Gichon (1991), p. 3201; Gichon (2002), p. 1868, p. 1901 and p. 193; parker (1990), p. 223; parker (1991), p. 499503; parker (2002), p. 789; shahd (1984b), p. 223; Whittaker (1994), p. 136. see also chapot (1907), p. 256; dabrowa (1986), p. 94; isaac (1989), p. 243. 245 hogdon (1989), p. 178; Graf (1989a), p. 34451; hartmann (2001), p. 823; Kuhnen (1991), p. 32930; leadbetter (2002), p. 768; lewin (2002), p. 91. see also Graf (1978), p. 123; sartre (1991), p. 332 (= sartre (1997), p. 316); Weerakkody (2000), p. 114. cf. Gichon (2002), p. 1901. 246 ball (2000), p. 32; Graf (1978), p. 7; hoyland (2001), p. 101; isaac (1989), p. 243; p. 250; isaac (1992), p. 717; isaac (1998b), p. 1245; Konrad (2003), p. 244; macdonald (1993), p. 3356; mehl and schmitt (2005), p. 10; sartre (1991), p. 334 (= sartre (1997), p. 318); sartre (2005), p. 69; Wells (1991), p. 480. see marx (1992), p. 2578; schmitt (2005), p. 421. 247 ball (2000), p. 32; banning (1986); banning (1987); banning (1988), p. 734. 248 banning (1986); banning (1988). 249 on the Limes Palaestinae see Gichon (1991), p. 3224. on the Limes Arabicus see Graf (1978), p. 13; parker (1990). on the Strata Diocletiana see Whittaker (1994), p. 1367. on military installations in the roman near east see generally bowersock (1994b), p. 1206; bowersock (1976); butcher (2003), p. 41520; eadie (1986); Gregory (19961997); isaac (1989), p. 244 56; Kennedy and riley (1990); Konrad (2003); millar (1993), p. 13740; parker (1986a); par- ker (1986b); parker (1991); parker (2002); pollard (2000), p. 1320; lewin (2002), p. 928; Kissel (2002); mayerson (1986); sartre (2005), p. 1435; RE Xiii 1 (1926), col. 65660 s.v. Limes (fabricius). on roman fortiications in northern mesopotamia see dillemann (1962), p. 195216. on fourth-century fortiications see shahd (1984a), p. 46590. 250 bernbeck (1993), p. 168; dussaud (1907), p. 45; petit (1971), p. 1234; peters (1978), p. 31820; cf. Graf (1989a), p. 3423. 251 Gichon (1991), p. 320; Gichon (2002), p. 1913; Kuhnen (1991), p. 330; parker (2002), p. 78 9. 268 Ulf scharrer it is stressed that nomadic populations did not only live outside the sphere of the roman empire, but also within it. Thus, a limes is regarded not as a hermetically closed line but as a zone of contact. 252 finally the intensiied extension and strengthening of the defensive systems in the third century ad, especially under diocletian, is stressed, which is regarded as an indicator that rome in this period had to face nomadic peoples being of considerable strength. 253 The interpretation of the limites in the near east with respect to nomadic mo- vements depends on two underlying concepts, namely the general idea of a roman limes and the concept of the geographic zone of nomadic dwelling. With regard to the irst aspect, the old idea (though still occasionally stated) that a roman limes was a closed borderline between inside and outside the roman empire 254 is dated. currently roman limites in general, and speciically in syria and arabia, are regar- ded not as hermetically closed borderlines, but as a military limes, whose purpose it was to regulate movements including the prevention of smaller raids and the exal- tation of taxes. 255 accordingly the southern near eastern limites are said to have monitored nomadic transhumant movements. 256 This leads to the other aspect, the concept of nomadic dwelling. on the one hand it is sometimes stated that nomadic populations primarily live in the steppe or the desert, i.e. beyond the zone of an annual precipation of ca 200 mm. 257 following this concept it could reasonably be said that the roman limites divide the sphere of the roman empire, which is the rather fertile land, from the outside regions, and that their main purpose should be considered as protecting against nomadic raids into the cultivated land. 258 in this context rowton makes a distinction between exclosed and enclosed nomadism, the former designating nomadism outside the sedentary sphere, the latter nomadism within it. 259 as indicated in the third section, the relevant nomadic groups are to be found within the settled sphere or at least at its fringes. from this it may be conclu- ded that the roman fortiications in the irst instance had the purpose of monitoring nomadic and probably other movements rather than of closing the sown from the desert hermetically. 252 bennett (1997), p. 1778; hauser (2000), p. 194; isaac (1992), p. 74; isaac (1998b), p. 1359; isaac (1998f), p. 414; mayerson (1986), p. 36; p. 3940; p. 423; mayerson (1988), p. 745; mayerson (1990), p. 268; parker (1986b), p. 637; Wells (1991), p. 480. 253 parker (1986b), p. 6412; shahd (1984a), p. 145, regarding the limes as a dividing line bet- ween the desert and the sown. 254 mommsen (1908); RE Xiii 1 (1926), col. 5736 s.v. Limes (fabricius). on the history of scholarship on the meaning of limes see carri (1995), p. 3441; isaac (1998e), p. 3456. 255 bowersock (1976), p. 2278; Gichon (1991), p. 319; Gichon (2002), p. 18990; mayerson (1986), p. 44; parker (1987), p. 48. on a similar function of hadrians Wall in north britain see breeze (1982), p. 846; breeze and dobson (1987), p. 40. cf. carri (1995), p. 416; Graf (1989a), p. 343. 256 bennett (1997), p. 1778; Gichon (1991), p. 319 and p. 321; parker (1986b), p. 637. see Wells (1991), p. 480. 257 e.g. butcher (2003), p. 161 and p. 169. see isaac (1998f), p. 4134. 258 Thus stated e.g. by shahd (1984a), p. 145. 259 rowton (1976). see scharrer (2002b), p. 295 with further references to other works by row- ton. 269 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east With regard to the notion of raiding as a nomadic economic strategy, it has been pointed out above that raiding is just one of many nomadic strategies of adap- tion to, and interaction with, the sedentary world. The latter are especially suitable in regions being inhabited both by sedentary and nomad groups. before coming to the aspect of symbiosis it is irst necessary to evaluate the evidence on nomadic raiding and unrest in the spheres of the roman and the persian empires. There is some evidence of unrest in the regions covered here. literary sources often mention arab banditry and raids. 260 some authors state in a rather general way that arabs live from brigandage, 261 which is also said about the nabataeans. 262
already the babylonian Astronomical Diaries mention arab raiding in southern mesopotamia in the earlier parthian period. 263 Whether the so-called mesene text, stating that the arabs [] came about the land, 264 refers to peaceful migration or also to raids is debatable. pliny mentions the Attali, an arabian tribe of brigands, dwelling near charax, 265 clearly distinguished from the scenitae, who are said to live beyond them. 266 Thus at least in this case bandits and nomads appear to be two seperate groups. strabo, however, writes that the skenitai of southern mesopotamia were brigands and shepherds, migrating according to pasture and booty. 267 pliny, in another passage, mentions nomads, who harry the territories of the chaldaeans. 268
strabo reports that the people alongside the mountains in northern mesopotamia were harassed by skenitai and armenians. 269 The mention of the armenians leads to other brigand groups within the par- thian realm. The most important of these were mountain peoples, who are mostly described as raiding groups. 270 Whereas some of these peoples are said to be sub- ject to the parthians, the most prominent group, the Uxians of the Zagrus, seem to have been rather independent as they were already in the achaemenid empire. Well known are the heavy ights against them by alexander the Great, who inally managed to subdue them, although it is not clear for how long. 271 in the present context there is the question to what degree these mountain peoples are to be regar- ded as nomads, but unfortunately there are no hints in the evidence about this pro- blem. at least on the Paraikatenoi strabo reports that they were more interested in agriculture than other peoples. 272 from this the conclusion might be drawn that 260 e.g. cass. dio 36.17.3; 37.7a. 261 e.g. plin. HN 6.162; Just. Epit. 40.2. see sartre (1989), p. 1437; Wolff (2003), p. 135. 262 diod. 2.48.3. 263 sachs and hunger iii (1996) 124b rv. 20 (= schuol (2000), p. 39). 264 sachs and hunger iii (1996) 125a vs. 21 (= schuol (2000), p. 37): l Ar-ba-a-a x x x [x x] ina KUr i-se-gu-. 265 plin. HN 6.125: Attali latrones, Arabum gens. 266 plin. HN 6.125: ultra quos scenitae. 267 strabo 16.1.26, with scharrer (2004), p. 3156. 268 plin. HN 6.143. 269 strabo 16.1.26. 270 strabo 15.3.12. see strabo 16.1.1; 16.1.1718. 271 on the Uxians generally see plin. HN 6.133. on the Uxians in the achaemenid empire and their ights with alexander the Great see curtius 5.3.116, with Wiesehfer (2004), p. 189. 272 strabo 16.1.18. 270 Ulf scharrer most of the mountainous peoples had non-agricultural means of live, and besides brigandage this may have included animal husbandry. finally, also herdsmen in the parthian realm could be subject to brigandage. Josephus tells the story of asinaeus and anilaeus of nearda, Jews within the par- thian kingdom living from raids and tribute they extracted from herdsmen. 273 more important in this context are the remarks by abar: While the sasanid ruler shapur ii was still a child, arabs from bahrain made incursions to frs seizing cultivated land and local peoples herds of cattle, which was done for need of daily suste- nance. 274 Why the supply of these groups decayed is not clear, but at least here is a clear reference to raiding as a nomadic economic strategy. however, abar contin- ues that shapur, having grown up, made heavy counter attacks, irst in frs itself, afterwards on a substantial campaign leading him to medina in the south during which he killed many nomads, took captives and organised deportations. 275 a clear reference to nomad raiding in the east inally stems from Theophanes. With respect to ad 335/6 he writes that many assyrians in persia were sold by the saracens, probably as slaves. 276 With regard to the western regions, especially syria and palestine, banditry is a topic quite often found mentioned in the relevant literary sources, 277 but only rarely is reference explicitly made to nomads. occasionally arab raiding is being mentio- ned. 278 among the bandits mentioned are robbers in general 279 and clearly Jewish bandits, 280 some of whose actions are said to be anti-roman within the context of the Jewish war ad 6670. 281 especially within this period we ind religious-politi- cal groups labelled as brigands by Josephus, as there are especially the zealots and John of Giala and his followers. 282 in any case, some brigand groups seem to have been connected somehow with the desert or steppe or with the herding of animals. among the former is an egyp- tian claiming to be a prophet, who during the reign of nero tried to force his ent- rance to Jerusalem, coming from the desert. 283 a usurper to the throne after the death of herod, named athrongeus, who raided the country, is said by Josephus to 273 Joseph. Ant. 18.31471. 274 abar, Tarkh (History) i 833. 275 abar, Tarkh (History) i 8389. 276 Theophanes, Chronographica 33. 277 on banditry in syria, palestine and north-arabia see generally dentzer (1985a), p. 39899; Graf (1989a), p. 3849; isaac (1992), p. 7789; isaac (1998b); sartre (2005), p. 323, p. 1112 and p. 116; Wolff (2003), esp. p. 13556. 278 cass. dio 36.17.3; 37.7a; iust. Epit. 39.55; 40.2. 279 e.g. Joseph. Ant. 17.285; 18.274; 20.124; Joseph. BJ 1.204; 2.2289; 2.253; 2.271; Minh, Zeraim, Pea 2.7a.; 2.8a; Bikkurim 1.2b; Moed 2.5a; Tosephta II, Moed 2.12; see IV. Seder: Neziqim 6.1; 7; luke 10.30; John 10.1. 280 e.g. Minh, Zeraim, Berakot 1.3c. on the sicarii see Joseph. BJ 4.399409; 50913. 281 e.g. Joseph. BJ 2.2645; 6524. see sartre (2005), p. 1137. 282 John of Giala: e.g. Joseph. BJ 2.58594. see BJ 4.845. Zealots: e.g. Joseph. BJ 4.135147. see rie (2005), p. 101 283 Joseph. BJ 2.2613. see rie (2005), p. 102; sartre (2005), p. 120. 271 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east have been a shepherd (aoig). 284 The Greek term aoig, however, indicates ani- mal husbandry in a sedentary context, in contrast to nomadic pasturage. 285
Well documented are the measures undertaken by herod the Great against bri- gands ravaging syrian and palestine districts. apparently most important in this context are the Trachonitis, the auranitis and batanaea, which were added to herods realm by augustus with the purpose of securing these regions against bri- gands, whose raids seem to have been directed especially against damascus. 286 of these brigands Josephus reports that they lived in caves together with their cattle and even robbed each other. 287 eventually they were forced by herod to turn to agriculture. 288 While these bandits were not titled as nomads, there might be some striking parallels to the raiding activities mentioned in the safaitic inscriptions, which are analysed below. probably some of these groups lived a nomadic way of live, 289 others lived rather from brigandage. Within the context of herods cam- paigns against brigands in Judaea Josephus reports that there were families, 290
though it is not clear whether these had a tribal structure or just have to be regarded as clans or families. describing the successful campaings of herod against bri- gands ravaging the syrian frontier, Josephus mentions that the syrian villagers wel- comed the end of the bandits and especially of their head ezekias. 291 This remark shows that whole villages could suffer from brigandage. The most prominent brigands of the region apparently were ituraean groups. strabo reports that mountains in the lebanon were occupied by brigand arabs and ituraeans, who had fortresses as operational bases from where they raided the peasants in the clears and robbed merchants from arabia felix. according to strabo, after the successful campaigns of pompey against the ituraeans security from raids had been established in the region by roman soldiers. 292 in any case an inscription from the augustan period states that Quirinus had fought against an ituraean fortress in the mountains. 293 apparently the ituraean threat to the peasant popula- tion seems to have ended after this period. 294 in modern scholarship the ituraeans 284 Joseph. Ant. 17.27884, esp. 278; BJ 2.605, esp. 60. 285 on the distinction see bar-Yosef and Khazanov (1992b), p. 2; sartre [1990], p. 44; scharrer (2002b), p. 28990. on shepherds in syria-palaestine see butcher (2003), p. 1612; herz (2005), p. 1934; scharrer and Zangenberg (2005a), p. 108; Villeneuve (1985), p. 1256. see e.g. Mishnah IV. Seder: Neziqim 6.1. 286 Joseph. Ant. 15.344348; BJ 1.398400. see also strabo 16.2.20, with isaac (1989), p. 242. see Gebhardt (2002), p. 247; isaac (1992), p. 626; sartre (1991), p. 634 (= sartre (1997), p. 55); Weber (2002); Weber (2003); Wolff (2003), p. 1379. 287 Joseph. Ant. 15.346; 348. 288 Joseph. Ant. 16.271. 289 on references in ancient authors to nomads living in caves see scharrer (2002c), p. 2001; scharrer (2004), p. 314. a nomadic way of live is assumed e.g. by dentzer (1985a), p. 399; sartre (1989), p. 145. 290 Joseph. Ant. 14.4157; 42030; BJ 1.30913. 291 Joseph. Ant. 14.15960; BJ 1.2045. 292 strabo 16.2.1820. 293 ILS 2683,1113. 294 see dabrowa (1986), p. 94; isaac (1998b), p. 12640; macadam (1999), p. 280; sartre (1991), p. 320. 272 Ulf scharrer are titled mainly both as brigands and nomads, 295 and only seldom it is stated that they were not. 296 There is actually no evidence at all that the ituraean groups who lived from raiding had a nomadic way of life. curtius, describing alexander the Greats siege of Tyrus, mentions arabian farmers on the lebanon ighting against the macedonians. 297 if atkinsons assumption, that these could be ituraeans, 298 is correct, already with respect to this early time the ituraeans should not be regarded as nomadic. of course it is possible that curtius wrote from the perspective of his own time, when the ituraeans had been paciied. apparently, roman rule at the be- ginning seems to have provided security against robbery: strabo states that pompey had freed the farmers in the clears from robbers of the mountains, and that roman soldiers had established security for merchants from arabia felix against robbe- ry. 299 The evidence discussed so far reveals that banditry, when mentioned in the literary sources, does not necessarily imply nomadism. 300 later on in the period covered here, brigands are mentioned only occasionally. Thus the Historia Augusta mentions that aurelian on his way to palmyra suffered from mischief by the brigands of syria. 301 in this context it is very probable that these brigands were not ordinary robbers, but that their actions were directed by an anti-roman and pro-palmyrene motivation. hartmann assumes that these brigands were bedouins of the region, originally ighting on the side of palmyra. 302 This to- pic will therefore be dealt with in the ifth section. some evidence for conlicts between nomadic groups and the roman authori- ties might be found in the safaitic inscriptions. Unfortunately, however, the inter- pretation of much of the epigraphic evidence is far from unambiguous. a couple of inscriptions refer to an l rm. a matter of some dispute is the question whether l rm refers to the people of rome or an indigeneous tribe rm. 303 There are a couple of arguments in favour of both views. first of all rm is designated as l, a designation generally not used by the writers of the safaitic grafiti for larger political units, especially not the nabataeans. furthermore, two inscriptions mention the escape or the expulsion of rm. 304 if rm is an indigenous tribe, these inscriptions would not 295 e.g. sartre (1990), p. 49. 296 e.g. Gawlikowski (1997), p. 41. see altheim and stiehl (196469) i, p. 3147 and p. 3512, and Winkler (1993), p. 197, who write that the ituraeans originally were a nomadic tribe which had become sedentary. according to Jones (1931), p. 269 in the roman period the ituraeans had become sedentary. 297 curtius 4.2.24. 298 atkinson (1980), p. 300. 299 strabo 16.2.18; 16.2.20, with isaac (1989), p. 242. 300 sartre (2005), p. 233. 301 sha Aurel. 26.1. 302 hartmann (2001), p. 382. 303 l rm referring to rome: butcher (2003), p. 409; eissfeldt (1954a), p. 94; Graf (1989a), p. 375 6; isaac (1992), p. 73; moors (1992), p. 311. l rm referring to a tribe rm: Khraysheh (1995), p. 411. see hartmann (2001), p. 84; sartre (1985), p. 68. on the problem see macdonald (1993), p. 3289. 304 escape of rm: pUaes iV c 675. expulsion of rm: CIS V 12. see the critical remarks of mac- donald (1993), p. 330. 273 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east cause any problems, as their wording is that of similar events with other tribes discussed below. if rm stands for rome, it is a matter of question whether the in- scriptions refer to either the defeat of a roman force by nomadic groups or by ano- ther force, for example the palmyrenes or persians. assuming that the defeat was caused by nomadic groups, this would require a strong military organization of these. a inal conclusion on this issue is presently beyond reach. a further inscrip- tion, similarly using the wording of tribal raiding, mentions rm raiding the naba- taeans. 305 again, if rm means rome this inscription probably refers to the roman annexation of nabataea in ad 106, which, however, appears to have been without violence. 306 if rm refers to an indigenous tribe, this inscription would not cause any problems either, since the nabataean realm is occasionally referred to as object of raids in the safaitic inscriptions. 307 however, no inscription has been found so far whose writer identiies himself as belonging to the l rm, and there is no ethnic group mentioned in literary texts which would it the safaitic name. furthermore, some safaitic inscriptions mention rebellions against rm, a notion not found in texts referring to intertribal conlicts. Thus, a certain abd states that he had escaped from a group of warriors (mrdt) in the year the nabataeans revolted against rm. 308 Unfortunately, nothing is known about such a revolt, but it can hardly be imagined that the nabataeans revolted against a group that was so small that Greek and latin sources did not take any notice of it. Therefore a revolt against the power of rome, probably after ad 106, might be assumed. probably the group of warriors which is mentioned in the in- scription appeared in the course of this revolt, although it is also possible that they were warriors of another tribe without any connection to the nabataean revolt at all. similarily, some safaitic inscriptions mention rebellions of other ethnic groups against l rm, especially by the Aw. 309 other inscriptions refer to people being being distressed by rm or escaping from rm. 310 Whereas statements of these kinds are not to be found in inscriptions mentioning intertribal conlicts, the wording of other references to conlicts with rm are, for example, ights with rm, the rm attak- king, the rm killing the tribe of Salmn, and inally the tribe of Baad being robbed by another group, probably rm. 311 305 CIS V 4866. 306 on the annexation of the nabataean kingdom see bennett (1997), p. 1756; bowersock (1994b), p. 1128; bowersock (1983), p. 7584; butcher (2003), p. 445; dijkstra (1995), p. 37; Gebhardt (2002), p. 87105; millar (1993), p. 926; sartre (1985), p. 6872; sartre (2005), p. 867; 1334; shahd (1984b), p. 1921. 307 see below. 308 Wh 2815. 309 Aw: CIS V 1292; 4438 (= SIJ 39). others: Khraysheh (1995), nr. 6; SIJ 78. see also SIJ 707. see Graf (1989a), p. 3768; Graf (1989b), p. 1523; sartre (1982a), p. 1278. 310 being distressed: e.g. PUAES iV c 640. escape: e.g. PAAES iV 5,59; CIS V 1713; 3688; 3721; 3776; 37878; PUAES iV c 87; 94; 157; 406; SIJ 352. 311 attack on a certain mtum: CIS V 4439. Salmn being killed: CIS V 1151. Baad being rob- bed: CIS V 4447. 274 Ulf scharrer one inscription mentions rm wintering near abila. 312 if rm was an indigenous ethnic group this would not cause any problem, as it could stand for a nomadic group spending the winter at that place; if rm stands for rome, the inscription can only be understood as a reference to roman troops being on, or returning from, campaign who used abila as winter quarters. finally, some inscriptions mention a war of rm. 313 so far, the phrase war of is only found with respect to greater political and ethnic units such as the nabataeans, the Jews or dedan in a Thamudic inscription. 314 macdonald convincingly states that the references to a war of the nabataeans does not necessarily imply that the writers of the inscriptions were in- volved in the struggles. 315 The same can be said about the references to a war of rm. There are other inscriptions which, with caution, could be interpreted as evi- dence for roman-nomadic conlict. an inscription states that the emperor (hmlm) ined the tribe of Aw. 316 The writer of this inscription declares to be on the look- out for his imprisoned fellows. if the roman emperor is meant and if rm stands for rome, the ining of the Aw, and probably the imprisonment of some members of this ethnic group, could possibly be connected to the above-mentioned revolt of the Aw against rm. it is debatable, however, whether the emperor mentioned is the roman one. he is not designed as king (mlk), but as emperor. in this context in- scriptions referring to a revolt of a certain damas need to be discussed briely. The irst inscription, written by a certain Khair of the l of Msikat, mentions the revolts of dama and of a certain murib. The writer states that he is on the look-out for the enemy and asks allt and -ar for securitiy and existence. 317 another in- scription, referring only to the revolt of dama, is written by a certain magd of the l of aif. 318 in an important article Winnett interprets these inscriptions as a revolt against the nabataean king rabbel ii (ad 71106), against the background of the weakness of the nabataean empire. 319 While Winnetts arguments are certainly stri- king, his interpretation is of course not conclusive. at least one other inscription records that murib revolted against the emperor. 320 if this is the roman emperor and not the nabataean king there are three ways to interpret the evidence: firstly, dama revolted against the nabataean king and in the same time murib revolted against the roman authorities. secondly, both revolted against rome, and no revolt against the nabataean authority is implied. Thirdly, both revolted against rome and the nabataean kingdom, regarding a rebellion against an ally of rome as a re- 312 CIS V 1868. 313 PAAES iV 5,45; CIS V 533; 2815; 4448. 314 War of the nabataeans: PAAES iV 5,45; CIS V 220; 3680; Wh 2113. according to sartre (1985), p. 68, these inscriptions refer to ad 106. War of the Jews: SIJ 688. War of dedan: Ph. 266. 315 macdonald (1991), p. 111. 316 PUAES iV c 644. 317 SIJ 287. 318 SIJ 823. 319 Winnett (1973), followed e.g. by bowersock (1983), p. 1556. 320 SIJ 281. 275 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east volt against the roman emperor himself. so far, none of the three ways of interpre- tation can be favoured. Two inscriptions written by two brothers from the tribe of Daaf might also refer to quarrels with the roman sedentary world: both were written in the year in which the tribe of Qamar attacked the government or empire (sln). 321 in addition some inscriptions refer to an escape or protection from the government or em- pire. 322 Unfortunately it is not clear whose government is meant, be it roman, of another tribe or of a local or regional power like the nabataeans. a certain malkat in an inscription near namra asks -ar for protection against the government, and a certain unain states that he escaped from the namrat of the government or empire (nmrt hmln) to the tribe of Aw. 323 at least in these cases the roman government can be assumed, and it seems that the Aw provided some sort of protection against it. in this context it is noticeable that there was a roman castel- lum at namra. 324 The inscriptions should probably be read in the context of the revolt of the Aw against rm. in any case, it is still debatable whether sln always refers to the roman authorities, as is commonly assumed. 325 besides the inscriptions discussed above, others also mention captured per- sons. 326 it is possible, though certainly not imperative, that these were imprisoned by the roman authorities. at least some of these inscriptions might also refer to persons being captured by members of other tribes, and the same can be said about inscriptions mentioning a guard arresting members of a tribe: 327 hartmann assumes roman police actions, 328 but it cannot be decided clearly whether in each case the guard mentioned is roman, nabataean, Jewish, palmyrene or a local one. There are other inscriptions of which the interpretation is ambiguous. one in- scription refers to a rebel against the king. 329 another one mentions a year in which a tower of the king in the high region of Yarkhn perished. 330 This inscription has been interpreted as a reference to the extermination of a roman tower and its garri- son by arabs. 331 a grafito mentions the escape from Qar naqat, about which nothing is known so far. 332 and inally some inscriptions refer to a king (mlk) wa- ging war against certain tribes. 333 it seems debatable whether all these texts are to be read in a direct roman context: it is not conclusive at all that the king mentio- ned in the inscriptions is a roman one. it could also be a reference to a nabataean 321 CIS V 1952; 2802: snt trq l qmr hsn. 322 PUAES iV c 424; 1013. 323 PUAES iV c 539; 1013. 324 see moors (1992), p. 345; CIL iii 1114. 325 e.g. ryckmans (1942), p. 135. 326 CIS V 2113; 2172; 2292; 2552; 4698; PUAES iV c 183; 643; Wh 2999; Wh 1565; 1675; ITham hU451. 327 Wh 1253. 328 hartmann (2001), p. 823. 329 ISB 163. 330 CIS V 3064: snt tsp r hmlk bsrn yrkn. 331 ryckmans (1942), p. 135, followed by Graf (1978), p. 5. 332 PUAES iV c 653. 333 Wh 1700a: against the SBTT. PUAES iV c 1065; SIJ 705. 276 Ulf scharrer or perhaps even a Jewish king. it has furthermore been stated that mlk could also designate a local tribal leader, 334 but for this view there is no support in the safaitic inscriptions. The places mentioned could therefore also have been nabataean or Jewish posts. a popular topic of the inscriptions is being on the look-out (tr), though it is seldom speciied what is actually being watched for. 335 it seems that look-outs could be special places or structures, since some grafiti mention the ownership of a look-out. 336 some inscriptions do specify what is being watched, for example animals, enemies, more rarely nabataeans, rm and other peoples, the own men or a saddle back. 337 finally, Tanner has interpreted a Greek inscription from the area of isma, according to which romans always win, as referring to nomadic incursions during the Jewish war. 338 of course this interpretation is possible, but not neces- sary: there is no reference to nomads at all in the inscription, and it might equally refer to the above-mentioned unrest within palestine. however ambiguous the interpretations of the safaitic texts remain to be, there seems to have been at least some nomadic unrest directed against the roman autho- rities, especially the rebellion of the Aw: bringing the evidence on their revolt together, it appears most probable that the roman authorities were indeed faced with them. furthermore, besides the somehow contradictionary evidence on rm, on the whole it still seems to be the case that the term designated rome. if so, at least some evidence of conlict between the roman authorities and nomadic groups can be found. however, there is, at least in the safaitic inscriptions, no evidence at all of a large scale attack of a nomadic group against the roman empire, and we should rather assume some sorts of raids. 339 in the case of the Aw, the breaking with rome seems to have been purely onesided, as rome apparently answered the at- 334 on mlk as nabataean king: Graf (1989a), p. 368. on mlk as a tribal leader shahd (1984b), p. 31 n. 38. 335 e.g. CIS V 5; 412; 456; 4851; 545; 1345; 220; 235; 294; 341; 344; 351; 361; 406; 434; SIJ 87; 135; 235; 240; 263; 323; 534; 590; 681; 699; 718; 729; 764; 776; 781; 809; 814; 851; Wh 29; 66; 17475; 18788; 224; 267; 271; 317; 319; 334; 350; 357; 380; 407; 426; 580; 599; 60102; 612; 701; 705b; 898; 968; 982; 1031; 1116; 1127; 1148; 1591a; 1601; 1763; 1906; 1940a; 1940c; 1974; 1978; 1983; 2137; 2255; 2328; 2381; 2534; 2806; PUAES iV c 184; 354; 424; 613; 660; 895; 1010; 1069; ISB 87; 90; Zeinaddin (2000), inscr. 9; 11. see also being on guard (r): SIJ 435; Wh 608. 336 Wh 245; 270; 318; 1516; 1612; 166364; 1916; 1961b; 2554. 337 animals: e.g. Wh 54; 359. camel: Wh 1996a; horse: Wh 54. mount: Wh 2837. sheep: SIJ 752 (?). donkeys: SIJ 784. live-stock: Wh 3724. enemies: e.g. SIJ 420; 808; 8534; 946; Wh 155; 290; very probably 390; very probably 613; 624; 947; 2539; 3286; PUAES iV c 210; 469; 576; 606; 618; 698; 701; 708; 1263. nabataeans: e.g. SIJ 855; Wh 157. romans: e.g. PUAES iV c 709. saddle-bag: Wh 372. rain: Wh 72; 112224; 1215; 2005; 2256; 2278; 3401; 3533b. son and daughter: Wh 577. father: PUAES iV c 709; Wh 1901. fellow: ISB 365a; PUAES iV c 1056; SIJ 816; 837. rebell: ISB 66. firewood: Wh 1902. lions: SIJ 14. see also Winnett and reed (1970), p. 131 nr. 73; PUAES iV c 210; 400; ISB 15. awlat: SIJ 716. 338 SEG Xl 1524 (= AE 1990, 1016), with Tanner (1990), p. 1858. 339 see butcher (2003), p. 409; Gebhardt (2002), p. 247 n. 5; isaac (1998b), p. 124; macdonald (1993), p. 3334. 277 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east tempts simply with ining the group and probably with taking some of its members hostage. in the third century ad there are some references to campaigns by roman em- perors against arabs and saracens. an important campaign is the one by septimius severus. according to eutropius and the Historia Augusta he defeated the parthi- ans and the inner arabians (Arabes interiores) and hence received the title Arabi- cus, among others. 340 This campaign is sometimes viewed as testifying to an in- creased nomadic menace. 341 however, according to cassius dio, severus also campaigned against hatra, during which siege he lost many soldiers since he was repeatedly attacked by arabian cavalry. 342 Thus, following the notion of Arabia in the Graeco-roman authors, as discussed above, the arabian campaigns of septi- mius severus were not necessarily directed against nomadic groups, although ights with some of these groups could have been involved. Towards the end of the third century ad there are occasional references to the campaigns by roman emperors against the saracens. The Panegyrici Latini men- tion that maximian in ca ad 290 subdued the saracens. 343 finally, the reorganiza- tion of the eastern frontier under diocletian is often regarded as a response to an increase of nomadic pressure, as is the emperors successful campaign against the Saraceni. 344 indeed, John malalas records saracen incursions during diocletians rule. 345 saracen raiding is also testiied by eusebius: with respect to ca ad 250 he writes that leeing christians were sold into slavery by the saracens. 346 apart from the rather ambiguous literary sources on the West some inscriptions too are dubious for the uncertainty of their readings. a latin inscription from a ro- man fort near Khan Kosseir, northeast of damascus, dated to ca ad 193, states that it was built with respect to public security and the terror of the scenitic arabs. 347
in addition, an inscription from the sinai dated to ad 18991, which i have quoted above, records that arabs devasteded the land. 348 if the semitic term Arab means desert or steppe dwellers, this inscription would testify to some nomadic raiding on the sinai. an important document is the Greek section of an honorary inscription from palmyra for oglu from ad 199. 349 it records how oglu was honoured because 340 eutr. 8.18.4; sha Sev. 9.910. The titles given by eutropius are conirmed by the epigraphic evidence: see e.g. bernand (1999), nr. 14. 341 see hartmann (2001), p. 823. 342 cass. dio 76.11.2. see luther (1997), p. 173 n. 284. 343 Pan. Lat. 11.5.4, with nixon and rodgers (1994), p. 89. see also millar (1993), p. 434. 344 leadbetter (2002), p. 868; parker (1986b), p. 643. on diocletians campaign against the sa- racens paneg. lat. 11 [3].5.4. see Graf (1989a), p. 3467; isaac (1992), p. 73; (1998a), p. 125 n. 12 345 malalas 12.38. 346 euseb. Hist. Eccl. 6.42.4. 347 CIL iii 128: in securitatem publicam et scaenitarum Arabum terrorem. The reading of the inscription is not conclusive: see Gebhardt (2002), p. 24950. 348 NSI 107. see sartre (1982a), p. 127. Kuhnen (1991), p. 32930 interprets the inscription as referring to conlicts between rome and nomads, but this is not at all sure. 349 Inv. X 44,4 (= PAT 1378; asad and Yon (2001), nr. 16; SEG Vii 139 (Greek section only); 278 Ulf scharrer he took part in frequent campaigns against the nomads. 350 Unfortunately the pal- myrenean section does not have an equivalent for the term. in any case it is obvious that palmyra had to protect its caravans against assaults, at least some of which were nomadic. 351 The threat posed by nomadic groups should not be exaggerated, since the oglu-inscription is the only one which explicitly mentions nomads. Whereas it is sometimes stated that nomads were the greatest danger to palmyrene caravans, 352 the evidence for this is rather sparse and ambiguous. a palmyrene in- scription from ad 144 explicitly mentions robbers (line 7: gyy) under the com- mand abdallat the ahitaia (line 15: [a]ooo0E eri0gvE / line 7: bdlt yhty). 353 however, the robbers mentioned in the inscription do not seem to have been nomadic. it is stated explicitly that abdallat brought the robbers together (line 15: toi uaoutou ouvo0rioi / line 7: dy kn ). it is not clear either whether Ahitaia is a tribal or a place name. 354 finally, it ought to be emphasized that on the whole there is not much direct evidence in the palmyrene inscriptions for caravans in dan- ger of being plundered. 355 and there is no evidence either that palmyra had treaties with nomadic groups to secure caravan trafic. 356 There does not seem to be any good evidence in the safaitic texts for raiding of palmyrene territory. only one inscription might be interpreted as a reference to some sort of conlict: a certain imrn states that he came to Tadmor and killed a man called ha-Mlik bn FTNY. 357 according to Winnett and harding, the editors of the inscription, the name FTNY, which so far is not attested in safaitic inscripti- ons, could be of palmyrene origin. however, two points have to be stressed: irstly, the conlict might have been purely between individuals, and secondly, the attribu- tion of names to certain ethnicities often appears to be quite dubious. 358 in this context the assumption of the title Arabicus Maximus by the palmyrene Augustus Vaballathus needs to be mentioned briely. 359 hartmann suggests that Vaballathus in ca ad 270 assumed this title after his victories against arab nomads who raided schuol (2000), p. 846, with comments; hartmann (2001), p. 523). see altheim and stiehl (196469) i, p. 346; ingholt (1976), p. 129; matthews (1984), p. 168; millar (1993), p. 332. 350 lines 34: xoi oio to / xoto tev voooev ototgyio ouvoorvov. 351 bowersock (1989), p. 79; hartmann (2001), p. 427; maraqten (1996), p. 2302; sartre (1991), p. 332; sartre (2005), p. 238. on palmyrene caravans being in danger of being harassed see e.g. the inscriptions PAT 0197 (= Kaizer (2002), p. 602; schuol (2000), p. 845); Kaizer (2002), p. 633. see generally dirven (1999), p. 37; Gebhardt (2002), p. 2856; hartmann (2001), p. 64; matthews (1984), p. 1678; millar (1998b), p. 1323. dirven (1999), p. 37 n. 144 interprets PAT 0197 as referring to nomadic assaults, but this is not conclusive. 352 e.g. maraqten (1996), p. 232. see also matthews (1984), p. 164. 353 Kaizer (2002), p. 623. see maraqten (1996), p. 232; millar (1998b), p. 133. 354 see dirven (1999), p. 378 n. 144. according to maraqten (1996), p. 232, the robbers mentio- ned in the inscription were nomads. 355 see maraqten (1996), p. 231. 356 Thus stated e.g. by maraqten (1996), p. 232; matthews (1984), p. 164. 357 Wh 2833a, with comm. 358 macdonald (1999), esp. p. 2546; contini (1987), p. 278; Kaizer (2002), p. 57; Kaizer (2004a), p. 170 n. 32. see generally scharrer (2006), p. 3525, with further references. 359 ILS 8924. on Vaballathus see hartmann (2001), p. 24259. 279 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east palmyrene territories and some of whom might have been in persian service. 360
again, it cannot be stated conclusively to what extent sedentary arabs too might have been referred to by this title. i have mentioned above some possible references in the safaitic inscriptions to the nabataean kingdom. in scholarship nabataean fortiications are commonly as- sumed to have had the purpose of controlling and warding off nomads. 361 indeed, besides the possible evidence discussed above in the context of roman-nomadic conlicts, there is occasionally some direct evidence in the safaitic inscriptions with regard to the nabataean territory as an object of raiding. 362 a certain JFN states that he has become poor and he asks ru for retribution (qbt) from the nabataeans. 363
apparently this JFN regards the nabataeans as the cause of his poverty, but the speciic conditions of this remain in darkness. maybe JFN had to pay tribute, or perhaps he was plundered by nabataeans. furthermore, a certain mulaikat asks ru for help to get booty from enemies, from the edessenes (? RHY), the naba- taeans and the awlat. 364 at least in the case of the (probable) raid into edessene territory the god helped him, since he states in another grafito to have carried off booty from the edessenes. 365 finally an inscription asks for rus protection against a certain mliku. 366
This inscription could be interpreted as referring to one of the nabataean kings of this name, but of course the request could equally have been directed against the leader of a nomadic ethnic group, and it could even belong to the context of an in- dividual feud. The same can be stated about an inscription which records that a certain rithat took a Wakat prisoner: 367 either this inscription refers to a naba- taean king aretas or again the inscription refers to a rather individual problem. The inscriptions by mulaikat reveal that, apart from the nabataeans, other local powers could also be subject to nomadic raiding. some inscriptions cannot be inter- preted conclusively, as some of them for example mention rebelling (rg) and re- bels (rgy), generally without speciing what or whom is rebelled against. 368 fur- thermore an inscription mentions the conquest of DB (qhr db). 369 Unfortunately it is not clear whether DB is a region or an ethnic group, and it cannot be known eit- her who was the conqueror, whether it was one of the local powers or a nomadic ethnic group. another inscription mentions the obliteration of the tribe of RFT. 370
in this case it is not clear either whether this tribe became obliterated by roman or 360 hartmann (2001), p. 2668. 361 e.g. bowersock (1983), p. 1545; Gichon (2002), p. 188; parker (1990), p. 222. see sartre (1991), p. 64 (= sartre (1997), p. 55); shahd (1984b), p. 22. 362 e.g. the rahya raiding the nabataeans: CIS V 2570. see also Wh 3925. see bowersock (1983), p. 154; Gichon (2002), p. 188; parker (2002), p. 78. 363 Wh 3747. 364 Wh 3736a. 365 Wh 3605. 366 CIS V 2172. 367 SIJ 296. 368 e.g. CIS V 303; 4119; ISB 66; SIJ 39; 289. 369 SIJ 851. 370 Wh 3931. 280 Ulf scharrer regional powers or by another tribe. finally a certain iddn boasts to have raided a large populace (nm mm kbr). 371 The term for the people in this inscription is not l, but m, so it seems improbable that another nomadic ethnic group is referred to and more likely that a sedentary community was the object of the raid. however, it cannot be stated conclusively what the term large (kbr) implies, be it a larger vil- lage, even a city, or the territory of a local power. The same has to be stated about occasional references to oppressions: 372 unfortunately it is unknown who oppressed whom. besides the raiding of local powers there is some occasional evidence in the safaitic inscriptions for raids into the sedentary and agricultural sphere in general. however, much of this evidence is rather ambiguous. Thus, the reading of an in- scription mentioning raiding in arable lands is uncertain. 373 another inscription sta- tes that a certain otherwise unknown place RL was destroyed by the tribe of BB. 374 Unfortunately it is unclear whether RL refers to some sedentary settle- ment or a region of nomadic dwelling. also the interpretation of an inscription which mentions a raid into pastures is unclear: 375 the pastures in question could have been used in sedentary contexts or by nomadic groups. indeed, raiding and the desire for booty is a prominent topic in the safaitic and in some Thamudic inscriptions. many inscriptions include a request to the gods for booty, or (afterwards) a thanking them, most often ruay/ru and allt, but also other deities. 376 some inscriptions express a general desire for, or aquiring of, boo- ty. 377 it is remarkable that, at the same time, these gods are occasionally asked for peace and security. 378 apparently the writers of these inscriptions did not see any contradiction in their attitudes, and especially the inscriptions asking the gods for successful raids and peace at the same time therefore reveal that plundering has 371 ISB 390. 372 CIS V 223 (?). 373 ISB 438. 374 Wh 2255. 375 CIS V 3345. 376 To allt: CIS V 8; 70; 882; 1371; 1859; 2207; 2481; 4262; 4332; 4986; ISB 18; 76; 167; PUAES iV c 418; 1196; 1252; 1263; SIJ 37; 45; 56; 78; 88; 105; 114; 658; 700; Wh 24; 53; 153; 159; 167; 173; 177; 181; 393; 397; 575; 577; 599; 711; 732; 947; 999; 1019; 1022; 1030 31; 1070; 1105; 1666; 1697; 1725a; 1850; 2125; 2818. To baal: CIS V 3180. To baal-samy: CIS V 3149; PUAES iV c 259. To ruay / ru: e.g. CIS V 1084; 1556; 1757; 1961; 2266; 2315; 2514; 2682; 2765; 3085; 3121; 3156; 3382; 3450; 3598; 3811; 4055; 5047; ISB 78; SIJ 125; 184; 224; 253; Wh 1906; 2135; 2187; 2375a; 2812; 2975; 3731. To Yitha: CIS V 785; 2636; 3168. ru and allt: PUAES iV c 160. on the pantheon of the safaitic inscriptions see e.g. dussaud (1907), p. 11656; dussaud (1955), p. 1407; oxtoby (1968), p. 205. see also sartre (2005), p. 301 377 e.g. CIS V 2519; 4978; Wh 689; 1796a; Ph. 292z 378 inscriptions asking for peace and booty from allt: PUAES iV c 619; 1196; 1252. allt being asked for security and booty: SIJ 80; 261 (?); 729; 840; Wh 947; PUAES iV c 1263. request for security and booty to -ar: SIJ 59. request for peace and booty to -ar: ITham Jsa658. request for security and booty to -ar and allt: Wh 2837. request to ru for relief from enemies while having departed for plunder: SIJ 816. request for booty and protection from evil to rua: Wh 3730. 281 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east indeed to be regarded as a common feature of the nomadic life of the writers of the inscriptions, which is relected in their religious mentality. Whereas it is not clear in each case whether a raid was directed against seden- tary or nomad communities, 379 much evidence from the safaitic inscriptions points to intertribal conlicts, which has occasionally been discussed in modern scholar- ship. 380 some inscriptions state that a tribe expelled (br) another, 381 two inscrip- tions mention that the tribe of Qumair did injury to the tribe of Chumaiy, 382 and one inscription mentions the Aw warring with the Baad. 383 The Baad are also men- tioned as making peace. The writer of this inscription stems from the tribe of Nabar. 384 however, it must remain open with whom the Baad made peace. pro- bably this inscription refers to a peace agreement between the Baad and the Aw, referred to explicitly in another inscription. 385 a conclusion of a peace is also men- tioned in another inscription, according to which the tribe of Msikat made peace it has to remain open with whom. 386 another text mentions the Aw ighting with the abh, apparently with the purpose of getting booty. 387 The Aw as well as the aif could be subject to raids, as is clear from an inscription that states that there were incursions against the pastures of both groups. 388 a certain Taymo asks for the protection of the Gadd-Aw and the Gadd-aif against the tribe of yi who had apparently killed or captured some of his companions. 389 in this context an inscription mentions that the aif were cut to pieces (btr), unfortunately without saying by whom. 390 finally in some inscriptions gods are asked for protection from the tribe of aif. 391
i have already mentioned an inscription which asks for booty from the naba- taeans, probably the edessenes and the awlat. another inscription mentions the ighting against awlat, and in this case it is unclear too whether a region or the ethnic group itself is meant, 392 since the term l is not used. finally a certain adddat boasts to have expelled (br) the awlat and to have held them back (bs). 393 as well as the awlat, the Thamd could be involved too in conlicts with the writers of the safaitic inscriptions. 394 379 besides the requests to gods quoted above see e.g. CIS V 4276; SIJ 905. 380 sartre (1989), p. 1656; Wolff (2003), p. 155. on intertribal conlict for economic reasons at the beginning of the islam see orthmann (2002), p. 3358. 381 PUAES iV c 435; Wh 1231. probably CIS V 786. 382 PUAES iV c 2545. 383 CIS V 2577. 384 CIS V 4446. 385 CIS V 4394. 386 CIS V 787. 387 SIJ 59. 388 CIS V 2446. 389 CIS V 2795. 390 Wh 1849. 391 Wh 1698: request to -ar; Wh 1029: request to ru. 392 ISB 365a. With oxtoby (1968), p. 96. 393 Wh 1231. 394 Wh 1276; 3792a; 3792c. see Graf (1997b), p. 180. 282 Ulf scharrer a few inscriptions mention the seizing of animals, 395 which shows that raids could also occur between rather nomadic groups. accordingly a certain Y[] writes that he was poor and went on a raid. 396 in another inscription allt is asked for granting plunder to somebody whose supply had decreased. 397 it is clear that in this case raiding is considered as some sort of supplementary economic strategy. in a further inscription a certain man states that enemies drove him to despair. in the same inscription he also says that his goats bore young. 398 it can be assumed that his enlarged herd was his enemies object. in this context, many safaitic and some Thamudic texts mention somebody having fought (zz) and the killing of sin- gle persons, and some inscriptions refer to raids, mostly without giving further de- tails. 399 a further inscription mentions the loss of camels by robbery during migra- tion. 400 other grafiti state that somebody has been robbed, deceived, is being per- secuted, all as well without further details. 401 finally, the safaitic inscriptions occa- sionally mention rescue actions by members of a group to free a companion. 402 as stated above, it is not clear whether some of the captured ones were imprisoned by roman or nabataean authorities. in the same way references to slaves 403 are difi- cult to interpret: in most cases it cannot be said whether slaves were captured in the course of raids against other tribes or sedentary peoples, or whether they were bought in the context of commercial enterprises (see below). some inscriptions record their writers fear of enemies. 404 basically there were three ways of reaction to such mischief. The irst one was revenge (tbl). in the sa- faitic and some Thamudic texts most often blood revenge is mentioned, which is frequently asked from the gods. 405 in addition revenge is taken when one has been 395 e.g. donkeys: Wh 218. camels: Wh 179; 676. animals not speciied: CIS V 4848. 396 Wh 651. 397 ISB 76. 398 Wh 3562. 399 fighting: e.g. CIS V 1534; ISB 69; 154; Wh 53; 65; 123 (?); 128 (?); 290 (?); 782; 983; 995; 1147; 1253; 1591d; 1601; 1662; 2113; 2854; PUAES iV c 462; 573; 1261; SIJ 976 (?); Zein- addin (2000), drawings 23; ITham Jsa26; Ph. 270e; 297m. see also PAAES iV 5,120; SIJ 131. Killing: e.g. CIS V 16; 743; 2113; 3149; 4404; 4423; Wh 595; 607; 1198; 1200a; 3000; PAAES iV 5,134; PUAES iV c 2356; 297; 579; 587; 589; 590; 653; 658; 669; 1157. raiding: e.g. CIS V 3095; 4305; Wh 94; 1661; 2818; 3731; PUAES iV c 160; 742. War: CIS V 2209. on enemies in general see e.g. Wh 1019; lidzbarski (1908 and 1915) i, p. 42. 400 CIS V 2552. 401 being robbed: CIS V 1868; 2657; 3360; 4919; 5099. The tribe of Khil being robbed: CIS V 2192; 2297; 2318. being deceived: Wh 2584; 3134; 3393. being persecuted: CIS V 5088; 5121. 402 e.g. Wh 1518; 575; 610; 619a; 1027. 403 e.g. PUAES iV c 14243; Wh 346; 865. 404 e.g. PUAES iV c 306; 330. enemies in general: CIS V 57; 70; 420; 924; 994; 1362; 1432; 2023; 2683; 2816; 3062; 3754; 4261; 4284. see also Wh 1974. 405 request for blood revenge to ruay/rau: e.g. PUAES iV c 460b; SIJ 825; Wh 80. To allt: e.g. Wh 367; 1220; 17812; 2911; PUAES iV c 242; 305; 385; 518; 679; 751; SIJ 750 (?). To allt and -ar: PUAES iV c 461. other mentionings of blood revenge: e.g. PUAES iV c 233; 1266; Wh 1354; lidzbarski (1908 and 1915) i, p. 44. see also Wh 3596a. on blood re- venge at the beginning of the islam see orthmann (2002), p. 30215. 283 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east wronged or robbed. 406 sometimes vengeance in general is asked from the gods, again occasionally combined with a request for peace. 407 apparently, these requests were no pure threats: a certain LF states that he has killed someone and is now afraid. 408 The second reaction was escape. besides the inscriptions mentioning es- cape from rm, which have been discussed above, there are other texts mentioning hiding or leeing from enemies, other tribes and their territories and occasionally even from ones own companions. 409 The third way was to pray to the gods for se- curity and protection. i have already mentioned the joint requests for both security and booty. The gods who were asked for plunder were similarly begged for security and peace in general, as well as more speciically for protection from enemies. 410 in addition some inscriptions express a general desire for peace or security without naming any gods. 411 Whether in these contexts the enclosures found had the pur- pose of protection from raids is debatable. 412 With respect to booty sartre argues that also proit may be meant by that. 413 in this context the interpretation of a Greek epigram from sane is interesting. it states that a certain Kaianos erected a monument r ioig ototig, and that Kaianos was 406 being wronged: request to allt: e.g. PUAES iV c 1234. request to ruay: e.g. Wh 80. being robbed: Wh 179. 407 request for vengeance to allt: rykmans (1939), nr. 31; 39G. To ru: ITham hU80; hU789,8; littmann (1940), nr.129. request for revenge to nahy: ITham hU130. To Khil: ITam hU760. To attarsamm: ITham hU 645; Jsa 388. request for peace and vengeance to allt: PUAES iV c 518. see also ITham hU800; littmann (1940), nr. 136. 408 Wh 3364. 409 hiding or leeing from enemies: e.g. ISB 10; Wh 390; 398. escape in general: e.g. CIS V 92; 295; 617; 1742; 2076; 2820; 3097; 3111; 3931; SIJ 156; 183; ITham Jsa 547; Wh 153; 390; 1605; 1862; 2561; 3342; 3896. request to allt for escape: e.g. Wh 135. fleeing from ano- ther tribe: Wh 153. fleeing from the own companions: Wh 785. 410 requests for peace/security: To allt: e.g. PUAES iV c 90; 155; 156; 161; 189; 237; 245; 257; 326; 331; 353; 436; 469; 578; 595; 602; 606; 613; 618; 635; 649; 660; 664; 675; 678; 698; 708; 709; 718; 719; 7278; 753; 895; 1133; 1182; 1195; 1198; 1297; Wh 1849; 2139; 3562; SIJ 134; 240; 263; 284; 2956; 321; 350; 534; 681; 806; 837; 844; 897; Wh 1899; 19012; 1994; 2022; 2110; 2127; 2129; 2145; 2168; 2184; 2284; 2302; 2339; 2802. To baalsamy: Wh 54; PUAES iV c 258; 260; 722. request for security to -ar: SIJ 296; 745; Wh 61; 1698; 1771; 2706. request for peace to Gadd-Aw: PUAES iV c 1214. request for security to Gadd-aif: SIJ 132; 9112. request for peace/security to ruay / ru: ISB 10; 65; 72; 75; ITham hU767; SIJ 714; 716; 746; PUAES iV c 286; 293; 303; 734; 1095; Wh 75; 91; 1219; 1672; 1772; 2833a; 3286. To ai-ha-Qaum: PUAES iV c 417; Wh 633; 1978. To Yitha: PUAES iV c 262. request for security to allt and -ar: SIJ 208; 296; 300. request for protection to allt and Gadd-Aw: PUAES iV c 306. request for peace to allt and ruay: PUAES iV c 353. request for security/protection from enemies: To allt: CIS V 1278; 1871; 2003; 2194; 4355; PUAES iV c 17980; 184; 210; 330; 374; 404; SIJ 37; 715; Wh 173; 2125. To baalsamy: CIS V 2129. To Gadd-aif: SIJ 912; Wh 613; 1725b. To ru: e.g. CIS V 834; 879; 1077; 1548; 1930; 2187; 2315; PUAES iV c 495; Wh 2163. To ai ha-Qaum: CIS V 586. To Yia: Wh 2539. To allt and Gadd-Aw: e.g. PUAES iV c 184; 306. 411 e.g. dussaud and macler (1901), p. 367, nr. 11; p. 612, nr. 96; p. 689, nr. 124; dussaud and macler (1901), p. 1012, nr. 299; p. 117, nr. 398. General desire for protection against ene- mies: e.g. CIS V 31; 4251; PUAES iV c 427; Wh 973. 412 This has been suggested by eissfeldt (1954b). 413 sartre (1991), p. 333 (= sartre (1997), p. 317). see also sartre [1990], p. 43. 284 Ulf scharrer aougrio. 414 merkelbach and stauber suggest that this inscription was set up by an arab in roman military service, who retained his nomadic mentality by calling the proit by his service booty. 415 actually, aougrio does not have the meaning of booty, as it is interpreted by merkelbach and stauber, but just means rich of proit. This inscription is therefore not at all for certain written by a former nomad and does not support sartres view. however, a Thamudic inscription mentions booty by a caravanier, 416 and in this context it is supposed to be a reference to pro- it. in any case, when viewing the safaitic evidence together it is still very likely that substantial booty was gained by raids. finally, there is also evidence that Tankh groups raided other tribes. The irst ights obviously happened when Tankh who had come to mesopotamia met with groups which were already settled there. 417 abar occasionally mentions Tankh raids, thus at imyar. 418 most important in this context, at least for abar himself, is the Tankh king Gadhima, whom he presents as an effective raider of other tri- bes, at least sometimes with the purpose of getting livestock. 419 however, there are also other supplementary economic strategies to be found in the literary and especially the epigraphic evidence, which rather point to peace- ful interaction. in between symbiosis and conlict is the extraction of tribute from traders crossing nomad territory. strabo reports that on the route from syria to me- sopotamia there were halting places with water brought from elsewhere. The skeni- tai who dwelt there were moderate in their exaction of tribute, whereas the chief- tains of the euphrates region were not. 420 according to Wolff the skenitai here ought to be regarded as brigands, 421 but this must certainly be an exaggeration: as sedentary communities could exact taxes, so could nomad groups. certainly the most prominent example in the near east for collection of taxes is the famous tax-law of palmyra from ad 137. 422 among other topics it refers to grazing rights outside and inside the palmyrene territory and the import of wool, and this has reasonably been interpreted as evidence for the presence of nomads and their local trade with palmyra. 423 indeed, there are some safaitic inscriptions which mention going to palmyra, 424 and some safaitic texts have been found in the 414 peek (1955), nr. 375; merkelbach and stauber (2002), nr. 22/39/01. 415 merkelbach and stauber (2002), p. 414. 416 ITham hU657. 417 abar, Tarkh (History) i 747. 418 abar, Tarkh (History) i 749. 419 abar, Tarkh (History) i 7502. see also his nephew and successor amr b. ad as effective raider: abar, Tarkh (History) i 768. 420 strabo 16.1.27. see altheim and stiehl (196469) i, p. 2701. 421 Wolff (2003), p. 135. 422 CIS ii 3913; NSI 147; IGRR iii 1056 (Greek and latin sections only). on the tax-law in general see e.g. bowersock (1989), p. 802; brodersen (1987); Kaizer (2002), p. 52; matthews (1984); scharrer and Zangenberg (2005b), p. 112. 423 bowersock (1989), p. 71; p. 82; bowersock (1991), p. 42930; butcher (2003), p. 170; matt- hews (1984), p. 173. see also dijkstra (1995), p. 85. 424 CIS V 1649; 16645. 285 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east palmyrene. 425 Two inscriptions may be directly related to some sort of trading with palmyra, since they mention the driving of pack-animals and camels to the city. 426 Towards the east, dura-europus and its surroundings seem to have been fre- quented by groups of those who wrote the safaitic inscriptions. 427 Whether dura can be regarded because of this evidence as a centre for nomadic groups remains however the subject of debate. 428 at least it may be assumed that there was some sort of peaceful interaction between the people at dura-europus and the nomadic groups arriving there. 429 The same can be said about namra, which also was fre- quented by nomadic groups. many safaitic inscriptions testify to the presence of their writers at namra itself and its territory. 430 besides the above-mentioned tak- ing of plunder, there were apparently also peaceful actions: some inscriptions men- tion pasturing and slaughtering of camels in the region. 431 Quite striking is an in- scription by a certain Ward which mentions the seeking of green fodder at the ex- pense of the community. 432 Unfortunately it is not clear what exactly is meant by this: is it the community of namra on whose expense the fodder is going to be acquired? if so, does the inscription imply some sort of stealing? Whereas these questions can so far not be answered properly, it is quite likely that pasturing in the territory of namra was at least tolerated by its authorities, especially since there was a roman fortress. in general some nomadic movements elsewhere appear to have been rather peaceful, as some inscriptions mainly mention driving camels to and from the hauran and to rm. 433 furthermore a Greek inscription from the syrian village Zebireh, dated to ad 213, records that the Arisenoi and the Iachphirenoi lived near the Habibenoi, the inhabitants of habiba. 434 probably the Arisenoi are to be identiied with the Arsat, known from a safaitic inscription. 435 occasionally there are references to trading activities. pliny remarks that many peoples of western arabia were engaged in trade. 436 With respect to nomadic trade this can be supplemented by some epigraphic evidence. Thus, rock drawings occa- sionally depict caravans. 437 a Thamudic inscription mentions a caravanier. 438 besi- des the inscriptions mentioned above, in the context of nomadic peaceful interac- 425 ingholt and starcky (1951), nrs. 2.4; 8; 21.2; 34.3; 54b; 60; 63.2; 63.4; 8082b. 426 CIS V 663; PUAES iV c 718. see King (1990), p. 60; schlumberger (1951), p. 131. 427 e.g. CIS V 517580. see millar (1993), p. 445 and p. 450; macdonald (2005); moors (1992), p. 283. 428 Thus stated by dirven (1999), p. 6. 429 see millar (1993), p. 450. 430 inscriptions from namra itself: CIS V 34483641. inscriptions from the territory: CIS V 322348. see also the references to coming from namra (CIS V 241; PUAES iV c 675) and going there (PAAES iV 5,2; CIS V 523; 1656; 18945; 2803; 3143; 3878). 431 pasturing: PUAES iV c 406; 426. slaughtering: PUAES iV c 532. see also the driving of ca- mels to the region: PUAES iV c 4067; 426. 432 PUAES iV c 407. 433 hauran: e.g. Wh 161; 238. Rm: PAAES iV 5,31. 434 IGRR iii 1132. 435 Zeinaddin (2000), inscr. 7. 436 plin. HN 6.162. 437 e.g. Zeinaddin (2000), drawings 6; 9. 438 ITham hU657. on Thamudic caravans see van den branden (1966), p. 43. 286 Ulf scharrer tion with palmyra, there are other inscriptions referring to driving pack-animals. 439
Whereas in these cases it is not clear whether people traded with goods or with the animals themselves, thus securing the supply of animals for the great trading cen- tres and their entrepreneurs, other inscriptions mention goods in general or the tra- ding with salt speciically. 440 besides economic interaction there was also some symbiosis in the sphere of worship. While the classiication into nomad and sedentary cults is rather dubious, 441
there was nonetheless some religious interaction between the different spheres. Thus, some safaitic inscriptions can be interpreted as referring to some sort of no- madic pilgrimage to the nabataean sanctuary of baalshamin at s in the hauran. 442
The suggestion that there was a roman military presence at s in order to control nomads and their interaction with sedentary peoples 443 may be sound, but so far this hypothesis has not been veriied. other inscriptions testify to nomadic worship of gods in the palmyrene and in palmyra itself. 444 finally, in one inscription allt and baal are asked for safety, and the writer states to be on his way to palmyra. 445
since the worship of baal is seldom found in safaitic inscriptions, it can be assu- med that the palmyrene bel is meant. in the present context it has to be pointed out that pilgrimages and acts of worship such as the ones mentioned presuppose at least some degree of mutual accommodation between nomad and sedentary parts of the population in the region. 446 Thus, the overall picture of nomadic activities in the roman near east is di- verse, and sometimes it even seems to be inconsistent. first of all, there is no liter- ary or epigraphic evidence at all that there existed something like a nomadic me- nace to the roman and persian empires which threatened their security and exi- stence as a whole. The irst real crisis to the roman empire in the east caused by nomads might have been the campaigns of the saracen queen mavia in ad 378, and even in this case the extent of the threat she caused to the empire remains deba- table. 447 it is not likely that the military installations in the region served the pur- pose of parrying large-scale nomadic attacks on the empire itself. Whereas the main 439 CIS V 3661; SIJ 363. 440 Goods: SIJ 195. Trading with salt: Wh 24; 479. on trade of the writers of the safaitic inscrip- tions see sartre (2005), p. 263 441 Kaizer (2002), p. 567. 442 macdonald (2003b). see dentzer (1985a), p. 4045; pollard (2000), p. 2056; on the sanc- tuary at s see dentzer-feydy e.a. (2003); hammond (1973), p. 62. 443 pollard (2000), p. 97; 2056. 444 schlumberger (1951), inscr. nrs. 2.4; 21.2; 34.3; 54b; 60; 63.2; 63.4; 8182b. dirven (1999), p. 81. 445 CIS V 1665. 446 see Villeneuve (1989), p. 135. on the central function of cities for the religious life also of the country see scharrer and Zangenberg (2005b), p. 113. 447 on mavia see differing views e.g. of altheim and stiehl (196469) ii, p. 32832; ball (2000), p. 98100; bowersock (1994c); Graf (1989a), p. 3489; isaac (1998b), p. 125; mayerson (1980); millar (1993), p. 388; parker (1986a), p. 1456; sartre (1982a), p. 1404; schmitt (2003); shahd (1984a), p. 14258, p. 1834 and p. 188201. on later nomadic incursions see e.g. isaac (1998b), p. 1417. 287 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east function of the stronger northern fortiications obviously was the defence of the empire against persian campaigns, the installations in the south as well as the na- bataean posts seem to stand in the context of monitoring, controlling and securing nomadic movements. 448 of course it cannot be denied that there were nomadic raids against sedentary populations, although sometimes a clear distinction between nomadic groups and simple bandits cannot be drawn. 449 isaac even states that ancient nomads did not have an aggressive ideology: both the victims and the raiding nomads, for opposing reasons, exaggerated the spoil being taken. 450 This view seems to play down the raiding activities of nomadic groups. 451 it has been stated above that booty and plunder as well as peace or security were asked from the deities at the same time. Whether this can reasonably be called an aspect of an ideology is doubtful. howe- ver, it shows that raiding apparently was a somehow integral part of nomadic life. nomadic raiding seems to have been on a rather lower scale there is no evidence of large-scale raids, but only looting by a few persons is attested. 452 in this context it is even debated whether the military installations served the purpose of protecting the sedentary population against nomadic attacks. sartre sta- tes that nothing is known about what rome actually did in this respect. 453 he inter- prets even the military post at namra as serving the purpose of keeping order among the nomads rather than of protecting sedentary people. 454 This view dimi- nishes the function of the military installations. 455 earlier in this section i have argued that there are no clear borderlines between nomadic and sedentary zones of dwelling, and that the roman military installations cannot be regarded as such. 456 indeed, besides those texts discussed above, there are some other texts which attest movement across the borders: a safaitic inscrip- tion mentions someone coming from rm, another someone leaving the empire, a third someone spending the summer in rm. 457 one text even mentions the pasturing of the border (fr) along the canals (qnwt). 458 The same can be said about the naba- taean territory: a certain binarih states that he camped [returning] from the naba- taeans or because of the nabataeans (ll mnb). 459 of course the differences of 448 see dabrowa (1986); Gichon (1991), p. 319. cf. shahd (1984b), p. 246. on nabataean forti- ications see parker (1986a), p. 1168. on nabataean fortiications against neighbouring peop- les (ad repellendos gentium vicinarum) see amm. marc. 14.8.13. 449 see butcher (2003), p. 40910. 450 isaac (1998f), p. 412. 451 see robinson (1996), p. 435. 452 on the distinction see Whittaker (1994), p. 138. 453 sartre (2005), p. 69. 454 sartre (1991), p. 333 (= sartre (1997), p. 3167). 455 see parker (1991), p. 5023 456 see Graf (2002), p. 1535; mayerson (1986), p. 36. on later nomads migrating between the syrian coast and mesopotamia see dillemann (1962), p. 734. 457 coming from rm: SIJ 351. leaving the empire: CIS V 66. spending the summer in rm: Wh 1996a. 458 Wh 1199. 459 Wh 158. 288 Ulf scharrer the readings are important with respect to the question of peaceful interaction. 460 in this context, however, the inscription attests to nomadic movement to and from the nabataean territory. This is further supported by the references to writers of the safaitic inscriptions from within the nabataean realm. 461 apparently there were seasonal migrations between the steppe and the agricultural regions, 462 which were not hindered by military installations. Quite striking is the fact that antagonism and symbiosis could occur in paral- lel. 463 Thus, all sorts of interaction must have taken place on a very local level. With respect to nomadic groups, whether speciic members of them raided and tra- ded at the same time and with the same opponent or partner remains unknown due to a lack of evidence. probably different segments of the nomadic societies, inde- pendently from each other and at different times, followed varying economic stra- tegies with which the sedentary populations and other nomad groups had to cope. The realization of the very different ways of interaction between nomadic and se- dentary populations, and among nomadic groups themselves, forms a basis for the question of nomadic allies. nomadic allies in the preceding sections i have discussed the problem of nomadism itself and the dificulties in drawing conclusions from the evidence with respect to roman rule in the near east. subsequently, a rather complex picture of interactions emerged. in this section i will attempt to apply the results of the preceding sections to the prob- lem of nomadic allies themselves, which is the actual topic of this essay. first i shall deal with the problem of nomadic political organization. as a contrast i shall then proceed to discuss the political and social relations of nomad and sedentary groups on the regional level. i will then discuss the evidence for nomads as allies of the parthian and roman empires. This discussion shall be followed by a short sec- tion on the changes in the third century ad, which eventually leads to a sketch of the relation between the Tankh and the sasanid and roman powers up to imraalqays. nomadic political organization in the previous sections i already discussed the concepts of dimorphic and segmen- tary societies. Unfortunately we know hardly anything about nomadic social orga- nization in the roman period. apparently there were some sort of leaders already 460 Unfortunately hardly anything is known about peaceful interaction between the writers of the safaitic inscriptions and the nabataeans: see parker (2002), p. 78. 461 PUAES iV a 11; 434. 462 see Gichon (1991), p. 321. 463 against the simple reduction of roman period nomad-sedentary relations to antagonism, see also sommer (2005), p. 2067. 289 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east before lakhmid rule: according to strabo the arabian skenitai in the region bet- ween the euphrates and mesopotamia were divided into small sovereignties (ouvootrio). 464 a little earlier he mentions phylarchs on both sides of the euphra- tes. 465 finally he writes about an alchaedamnus being king (ooiru) of the rhambaeans, who were nomads dwelling west of the euphrates.The king can pro- bably be identiied with the arabian dynast alchaudonius who is referred to by cassius dio. 466 it is debatable whether the Greek terminology reveals anything about the organization of these groups. The term dynasteia implies that there was a leading family. With respect to the phylarch and the basileus this is not so clear, but it cannot be excluded. finally it is questionable whether alchaedamnus as king had a higher position than dynasts or phylarchs. There are other references to dynasts of arabians in the classical texts. against the background of what has been said in the third section, it cannot be known whether nomadic, sedentary or mixed people are meant in each case. flavius Josephus, for example, refers to kings and dynasts. 467 if alchaudonius and alchaedamnus are indeed identical, not too much can be drawn from the terminology. finally abar mentions arab princes of tribes in babylonia before the arrival of the Tankh. 468 some safaitic inscriptions might be interpreted as referring to leading men: thus a raid of horseriders was done under a leader (mr), 469 but it is not clear whe- ther this was just a temporary leader for the raid itself or a leading man of an ethnic group. another inscription states that a certain Yaslam was a powerful chief (hm). 470 other inscriptions mention an overseer (nr): a certain ausn asks Yia for help by driving away mnJm the overseer. 471 in another inscription only an overseer is mentioned. 472 again, it is not clear whether a nr was a leading man of an ethnic group or an ofice installed by regional authorities with the purpose of controlling nomadic groups. The irst of the inscriptions cited here could be viewed as supporting the latter interpretation, but so far no conclusions can be drawn. Thus there are at least three terms for leadership in the safaitic inscriptions, apart from the word king (mlk), for which references have been cited above in the context of nabataean and roman hostile relations to nomadic groups. 473 other safaitic in- scriptions probably point to leading men without using one of these terms: two in- scriptions mention a year in which Ym warred with the l of Thamd. 474 fur- thermore, a certain adddat boasts to have expelled the awlat and to have held 464 strabo 16.3.1. 465 strabo 16.1.27. 466 strabo 16.2.10; cass. dio 36.2.5. The identity is implied by rets (2003), p. 348, and sartre (2005), p. 36. 467 Joseph. BJ 2.67. 468 abar, Tarkh (History) i 747. 469 CIS V 4276. 470 Wh 2006. 471 Wh 2163. 472 Wh 2163. 473 see n. 3334. 474 Wh 3792a; 3792c. 290 Ulf scharrer them in check. 475 another inscription refers to a year in which rayatum brought back aif into power. 476 finally, in the fourth section i have refered to single people revolting against rm or the nabataeans. a single person could certainly not on his own wage war against a whole ethnic group, or control one, or bring a whole tribe back into power. The persons mentioned in those inscriptions are therefore li- kely to be leading men. however, the level of their leadership cannot at all be ixed: were the leading men from the safaitic inscriptions leaders of a whole tribe, of a segement, or even of a confederation of tribes about which we know nothing from the safaitic inscriptions? against the background of the evidence, so far there is no answer to these questions. in the third section i have discussed some of the problems of the interpretation of the rawwfa-inscription. The main problem is what exactly the term to tev Oo- ouogvev r0vo / rkt tmwdw implies, be it the Thamd in the sense of an ethnic group or of a military unit of the roman army. against this background the impli- cations of the nabataean term qdmy (b4), mostly translated as leaders, erecting the sanctuary appear to be controversial. presuming that the Thamd of the inscrip- tion are a confederation, it has been stated that there was no king over the group, but some sort of council of elders and leaders of subtribes. 477 according to some views the inscription thus reveals the rise of tribal confederations and their leaders to increased power. 478 if interpreted in this way, the inscription from rawwfa could be regarded as revealing a glimpse of a development from rather small to large nomadic ethnic units, at the end of which emerged the rule of the Tankh. however, if the temple and the inscription were set up by a military unit instead, no such conclusions could be derived from the evidence. in that case the qdmy were to be interpreted as military commanders. something more is known about the Tankh. it seems that at irst there were a couple of chieftains, for example al-qr, one of the irst to move with his group into mesopotamia. 479 according to abar, the Tankh Gadhima of the Banu Wa- bar was the irst to rule there. abar relates that other tribes joined him, that dele- gations were sent to him and that tribute was paid to him. 480 by getting a son amr by a woman of the lakhmid he became the founder of the lakhmid dynasty. 481 it is debatable to what extent the lakhmid actually were a tribe rather than a clan. The title ooiru / mlk is also attested for him in the bilingual epitaph of his tutor fihr from Umm al-Jeml. 482 When i discussed the migrations of the Tankh in the third 475 Wh 1231. 476 CIS V 3661. 477 see Graf (1978), p. 16. on this concept in general see Giddens (1986), p. 53. 478 bowersock (1994c), p. 134; isaac (1992), p. 239; isaac (1998f), p. 417; Kuhnen (1991), p. 329. 479 abar, Tarkh (History) i 747. 480 abar, Tarkh (History) i 750. 481 see abar, Tarkh (History) i 755. on the dynasty and problems of the historic tradition see rothstein (1899), p. 3860; ball (2000), p. 97. on genealogical problems of the irst lakhmids see hartmann (2001), p. 341. on Gadhima see equini schneider (1993), p. 46. 482 nabataean section: PUAES iV a 41; CIS ii 192; Greek section: PUAES iii a 238 1 ; SEG XXiX 1604. but see millar (1993), p. 4334, stating that the Gadhima of the inscription and of abar need not be the same. 291 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east section, i mentioned their orientation westwards. it is debatable whether the inscip- tion for fihr also attests to the extension of lakhmid power to the west. 483 at least Gadhima expanded into the Jazirah, and for this purpose he had to have the ruler of this territory killed. 484 abar continues that after Gadhima the Tankh were split into two groups, one under amr b. abd al-Jinn, the other under amr b. ad, the son of his sister, but that they eventually managed to come together. 485 Unfortuna- tely abar does not tell us how this happened. apparently amr b. ad became the next lakhmid to rule the Tankh. of him abar relates that he was the irst lakhmid ruler to settle at al-rah. more impor- tantly, he did not recognise local princes of the iraq. finally, according to abar he ruled the lands from iraq to the hejaz. 486 Thus, the title king of (all) Arab of the epitaph of imraalqays, son and successor of amr b. ad, gets more sense. in the third section i discussed the term saying, with Zwettler, that probably not all arabs were meant, but certainly a wide stretch of the northern arabian steppe. 487 besides the problem of the reading of the irst line, as discussed above, there are other un- certainties due to the erosion of the epitaph. The discussion about the reading of line 2 and the irst part of line 3 in the present context is not that important, as the sense seems to be basically the same: imraalqays subdued tribes and their kings. 488
however, the reading and the sense of the second part of line 3 and of line 4 is quite controversial. 489 The most important alternatives are that either imraalqays distri- buted the tribes among his sons (nzl bnyh lwb), 490 or that he dealt gently with the nobles of the tribes, and appointed them viceroys (nbl bnbh lw wwklhm). 491
Thus, the way the king organised his power over the subdued tribes is a severe mat- ter of debate, and both alternatives seem to be entirely possible, be it the exercise of indirect power with leaving the leading men in their positions, or the direct integra- tion of the tribes into the Tankh confederation under the leadership of the lakhmid. if one does not take the term sons too literally, the irst view could be supported by a remark of procopius, according to which a certain Kaisios was chief of the Maddenoi, one of the subdued tribes mentioned in the namra inscription. This Kaisios probably is to be identiied with Qais b. salama, a cousin of imraalqays. 492
however, it is obvious that imraalqays exercised his power over a wide territory and its inhabitants. according to abar imraalqays ruled over the frontier region 483 millar (1993), p. 431. 484 abar, Tarkh (History) i 756. see hartmann (2001), p. 335. 485 abar, Tarkh (History) i 761; 768. 486 abar, Tarkh (History) i 7689. 487 on the inscription and its editions see above, n. 172 and n. 2347. 488 on this see bellamy (1985), p. 3740. on the tribes being subdued see shahd (1984a), p. 38 43. dussaud (1902), p. 415 and p. 417. on the campaigns see also altheim and stiehl (1964 69) ii, p. 3223. 489 see bellamy (1985), p. 35. on the discussion see bellamy (1985), p. 405; rets (2003), p. 46970. 490 dussaud (1902), p. 412; p. 4178. 491 bellamy (1985), p. 405, with the translation on p. 46, followed by isaac (1992), p. 239 n.118. on other readings see rets (2003), p. 46970. 492 proc. bell. 1.20.9 with Grunebaum (1963), p. 20. on the Maadd see shahd (1984a), p. 43. 292 Ulf scharrer of the arabs of rabah, muar and the rest of the tribes of the deserts of iraq, he- jaz and Jazirah. 493 if the reading of the end of the opening phrase (discussed in the third section) really is lrb klh (all Arab) this is, at least from imraalqays per- spective, hardly an exaggeration. 494 eventually he was succeeded in this regency by his son, amr b. imraalqays. 495 With respect to nomadic power we then face a development from smaller eth- nic units to a really large political and probably even ethnic unit, beginning at least with the expansion of Tankh power. This power was enlarged by the process of absorbing existing tribes (see the third section) by confederacies, and by con- quest. 496 certainly many tribes kept their ethnic identity, but this was broadened by the integration into the large confederation of the Tankh. 497 nomads and sedentaries: political interactions before ca ad 300 in this context and seemingly in contrast to the aspect of expansion of nomad po- wer, i will now analyse nomad-sedentary political and social interaction in connec- tion with the question of roman allies. in the second section i very briely sketched the mondern concepts of segmentary and dimorphic societies, which are marked by a close economic and socio-political interaction of nomad and sedentary groups. Whereas in the third section i discussed mainly the economic interaction between nomads and sedentary peoples, with the topic of socio-political interdependency i now turn to a ield crucial for the understanding of the problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east. first of all, there was apparently no attempt by the roman and parthian au- thorities to settle nomadic groups, a proceeding exercised by many empires and states up to the present day. 498 There are only two references to the settling of no- mads, but this was not attempted by either empire. The irst reference is from the beginning of the chronological scope of this paper: plutarch writes that the arme- nian king Tigranes, actually a parthian client king, removed the scenitic arabs to a nearby settlement for the purpose of trade. 499 Unfortunately, neither can the loca- 493 abar, Tarkh (History) i 834. see bowersock (1983), p. 1412; hartmann (2001), p. 348; sartre (1982a), p. 138. 494 see dussaud (1955), p. 65; isaac (1992), p. 240; sartre (2005), p. 362; shahd (1984a), p. 35 6; Taeschner (1964), p. 312. 495 abar, Tarkh (History) i 845. see on the rule over nomadic confederations Giddens (1986), p. 54. 496 on alliances see abar, Tarkh (History) i 748. 497 see dussaud (1955), p. 69. 498 sommer (2005), p. 52 on a roman control and encouragement of the sedentarization is too speculative. against such views with respect to the Decapolis see e.g. Wenning (2005), p. 145. see however the poetical account of some sort of sedentarization exercised by roman authori- ties on the Dahae living north of the caspian sea luc. 7.429: Nec vetitos errare Dahas in moenia ducat. on examples of modern programs of settling nomads see e.g. Ganzer (2002); martin (2002); offer (2003); scholz (1999). 499 plut. Vit. Luc. 21.4. see rets (2003), p. 3489. on Tigranes see sartre (2005), p. 2730; KlP, col. 8278 s.v. Tigranes 1 (duchesne-Guillemin). 293 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east tion of this settlement be traced, nor is it certain that this settlement was a new foundation. by this move, Tigranes obviously intended to get control over trade. The other reference is rather from the chronological end of this essay. in the fourth section i mentioned that shapur ii campaigned extensively in the arabian penin- sula against nomadic groups raiding sasanid territories. in this context abar re- cords that the persian king had many of them deported and settled at different places in his empire. 500 apparently, this coincides with practices of empires from the assyrian and achaemenid periods, and this practice is not speciically dealing with nomadic groups. 501 by his deportations shapur obviously tried to gain control over hostile elements. against the background of the absence of a nomadic threat to the eastern roman empire it is actually not astonishing that the roman authorities did not, as far as we know, take any steps to sedentarise nomadic groups. however, there is some controversion on the question to what extent nomadic, especially safaitic, groups became sedentary in villages or cities. in the third sec- tion i have discussed the problem of the Ubait. Whereas the evidence on a sed- entarization of this ethnic group might be regarded as ambiguous, there is some debate about whether other writers of the safaitic inscriptions became settled per- manently in cities and towns. The view that they at least partly did so is founded on two bases. 502 firstly, a few safaitic and Greek inscriptions naming ethnic groups have been found in sedentary contexts. 503 secondly, a couple of personal names found in village or city contexts such as bosra are regarded as safaitic names, and thus as pointing to a nomadic origin of their bearers who by then had become sed- entary. 504 on the other hand it has been stressed, in my view reasonably, that none of this evidence points to a considerable wave of sedentarization. first, the pres- ence of nomadic groups at a certain place does not prove and not disprove either them settling down, 505 but it points to some sort of interaction, as the examples from namra and the palmyrene which were discussed in the fourth section reveal. furthermore, as has been currently stated, the attribution of personal names to cer- tain ethnic groups is a rather ambiguous matter. 506 in any case, as i have argued, it cannot be disproved either that nomadic individuals or groups settled down, but the evidence on this is really sparse: only one safaitic inscription explicitly mentions 500 abar, Tarkh (History) i 839. 501 see e.g. briant (2001), p. 168; scharrer (2006), p. 34950. on deportations in the ancient world see generally Kehne (2006). see also plut. Vit. Luc. 26.1 and plin. HN 6.142 on the po- licy of deportation of Tigranes of armenia. on the deportation of the inhabitants of mesopota- mian singara to persia under shapur ii see amm. marc. 20.7.7. 502 This view has been suggested e.g. by beyer (1998), p. 198 n. 89; littmann (1940), p. 234; moors (1992), p. 284304; sartre (1982b); sartre (1989), p. 1589; sartre (1991), p. 333 (= sartre (1997), p. 317); Villeneuve (1989), p. 1345. With respect to bosra: de Vries (1986), p. 234; sartre (1982b). 503 sartre [1990], p. 41 and p. 456. cf. Graf (2002), p. 154. 504 sartre [1990], p. 467. see e.g. PUAES iii 4; 56; 244; 741; 744; 792; 800 2 ; 800 7 . bosra: e.g. PUAES iii 554 1 6; 567; 5802; 5936; 599. 505 see sartre [1990], p. 50. 506 see n. 358. important with respect to the current problem: macdonald (1999), p. 2568; 2627. 294 Ulf scharrer the settling (qrr) at BRKT. 507 somewhat dificult to interpret is a safaitic inscrip- tion from the palmyrene set up by a certain msik from the people of namrat (l nmrt). 508 probably here l is being used to describe a civil community, maybe a xoivov, 509 in this case the inhabitants of namra and its territory. it is not certain whether msik lived at least periodically a settled life at namra or whether he was a nomad being socio-politically bound to the town. one of the problems in this context is that of ethnic designations. There are basically three formulations of expressing ethnic identity. firstly, there are tribes (ug ) mentioned in village contexts: 510 an inscription from aerita dating from the time of commodus mentions a tribe of the Osainenoi 511 and another one mentions the tribe of the Dabanenoi. 512 a further inscription from dr il-leben is set up by a certain aurelius Glakos of the village rma of the tribe of the Chasetenoi. 513
Whereas not much is known about these groups, the tribe of Chauchab that is mentioned in a fragmentary inscription from rma is identical with the Kawkab known from safaitic inscriptions. 514 Therefore there seem to have been socio-poli- tical relations between village and steppe dwellers at least occasionally. secondly, the identity probably of a clan or a family could be expressed by the name of its head or ancestor. Thus an inscription mentions that a house was renewed by a cer- tain bachros of those of bachros (tev Boou). 515 Thirdly, local identities could be termed just with the sufix -os, and thus in many cases it cannot be known con- clusively whether a place- or an ethnic name is implied. 516 To mention only a few examples, there are mentions of a Nouaitenos, or the Maneinenoi. 517 sometimes it is clear that a sedentary community is implied, e.g. in the case of the koinon of the Seeienoi or the Sauroi. 518 interesting in this context are two inscriptions from Zorava, a metrokomia. 519
The irst one mentions the Saamenoi of/among the Zoravenoi. 520 it remains a que- stion whether the Saamenoi are identical with the am known from safaitic in- scriptions. 521 if so, this inscription would testify that at least a part of this ethnic group was integrated into the village society of Zorava. if not, this inscription 507 Wh 2411. 508 ingholt and starcky (1951), nr. 81b. 509 on the term see e.g. Grushevoi (1985), p. 534. 510 references are collected by moors (1992), p. 29399 and p. 3416. see also sartre (1999), p. 201; Villeneuve (1989), p. 137. 511 IGRR iii 1180. 512 PUAES iii a 786 6 . 513 PUAES iii 765 11 : xeg Pgro ug Xoogtrvev. 514 IGRR iii 1269: ug Xouo. on safaitic references to the Kawkab see n.118. on safaitic groups in village contexts see e.g. sartre [1990], p. 40. 515 PAAES iii 388. see also PUAES iii 756. 516 references are found in moors (1992), p. 3047. 517 Nouaitenos: cis V 2824. Maneinenoi: IGRR iii 1172. 518 Seeienoi: e.g. PAAES iii 428b. Sauroi: e.g. IGRR iii 1143. 519 on Zorava being a metrokomia: IGRR iii 1155 (= PAAES iii 432g); sartre (1999), p. 201. on metrokomiai in southern syria see sartre (1999); sartre (2005), p. 209. 520 IGRR iii 1156. 521 for references on the am see n. 118. 295 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east shows at least that different sub-identies existed within the community of the vil- lage. in this context the second inscription from Zorava is interesting. it states, that the farmers (yroyoi) of or among the Zoravenoi set up a nike for m. aurelius and caracalla. 522 Whereas this inscription is an example of some sort of emperor wor- ship in rural societies, it is more important to note that only the farmers of the vil- lage set up the statue. Therefore there must have been other groups, besides crafts- men also herdsmen. as stated in the fourth section, herdsmen are also known from rather sedentary contexts. if, however, the Saamenoi are the safaitic am, it might be that they did the shepherding on behalf of the village community. 523 of course all this is quite speculative and can thus only be taken as a hypothesis. With respect to village societies not much can therefore be stated clearly. in the second section i have argued that tribalism in general is not restricted to nomad societies, and this has also been stated reasonably with respect to near eastern vil- lage communities in the roman period. 524 This actually makes it quite dificult to interpret the evidence with respect to socio-political ties between sedentary rural communities and nomadic groups. apparently there are different interpretations, which do not exclude each other from case to case. firstly, connections between nomadic and rural sedentary societies have been stressed. 525 secondly, according to moors it may have been possible that nomadic tribes lived sedentary lifes in vil- lages or that some parts of ethnic groups were sedentary and others nomadic, thus being examples of segementary social organizations. 526 moors, with respect to the Aw, furthermore states that in springtime they pursued tillage and in the other seasons they migrated with their animals, thus being a typical example of semi- nomadic life. 527 Unfortunately the latter view cannot be veriied from the epigraphic evidence. The third view is quite sceptical about the question of nomadic groups becoming sedentary in villages. especially macdonald argues that there is no evi- dence on writers of the safaitic inscriptions having become sedentary. 528 sartre is a bit more speciic on that matter: the inscriptions in question do not say whether their writers have become sedentary in villages. furthermore it cannot be traced from the evidence to what extent their writers actually were integrated into the vil- lages social structures. 529 only some light may be shed on this problem by an in- scription mentioning a syndikos nomadon, an advocate of the nomads, of the 522 IGRR iii 1154. 523 on differerent occupations of tribes in roman time near eastern villages see macadam (1983), p. 1112. on nomads and villagers being one community divided into agriculturists and shepherds see butcher (2003), p. 170. 524 e.g. isaac (1998b), p. 155; macdonald (1993), p. 3523; sartre [1990], p. 47. on ancient near eastern villages in general see e.g. beyer (1998); sartre (1999); sartre (2005), p. 22433; Vil- leneuve (1985), p. 75113; p. 1216; scharrer and Zangenberg (2005a) with further references. on villages in the palmyrene see schlumberger (1951). 525 dirven (1999), p. 21. see also staubli (1991), p. 118. 526 moors (1992), p. 3367. The second view has been suggested also by sartre (1991), p. 3334. see also Villeneuve (1985), p. 1167. 527 moors (1992), p. 283. see also above, section 2. 528 macdonald (1993), p. 313. 529 sartre [1990], p. 478 and p. 52. 296 Ulf scharrer name Theodoros. 530 according to moors, this was an oficial whose function it was to be in contact with nomads. 531 apparently the inscription stems from a village rather than from a military context, but inal statements about this cannot be made. especially at villages many oficials who were syndikoi were found. 532 in the pre- sent context noticeable is also an inscription from a village in the hauran which remembers a certain iulius malchus, a syndikos of the Aouorenoi. 533 Unfortunately this ethnic group is not known from the safaitic inscriptions, and furthermore it is not designed as phyle. obviously this is an indigenous group, but its character is not clear. so far moors view appears to be reasonable. Thus, again there seems to have been some socio-political interaction between steppe and village dwellers. it cannot be said, however, to what extent the nomads of the inscription were really integrated into the village society, i.e. whether they were an integral part of it. against this background of evidence and discussion, at this point it is not reaso- nable to speculate about the possibilies of dimorphic or segementary structures in a rural context. of course, in some instances this might have been the case, but an overall unequivocal picture cannot be traced. at least it seems quite likely that there was some social interaction, whatever this may mean exactly for each particular case. mostly villages were socially and politically dependent on towns or cities. 534
Thus, if there existed social interaction of whatever kind between village dwellers and nomadic groups it can be asked whether this also was extended within the con- text of relations between villages and cities. Unfortunately, so far no answer can be given to that problem. however, quite often it has been stated in scholarship that also in the cities of the decapolis, namely at bosra, at least parts of nomadic tribes became sedentary. 535 again this view is based on the existence of names being at- tributed to the writers of the safaitic inscriptions, 536 which, as stated already twice, is rather problematic. furthermore mentions of safaitic ethnic groups and other tribes contributed to that picture. macdonalds and sartres above-quoted views with respect to nomadic dwelling at villages are to be applied to the problem of towns and cities: the references to safaitic tribes do not necessarily imply that they had become sedentary or formed an integral part of the citys social structure, alt- hough this is still possible. furthermore, it has been stated repeatedly that also cities were structured tri- bally. one of the main problems especially of near eastern cities is the question of whether the relevant tribes preserved the tribal structures of pre-urban societies or whether they ought to be regarded as artiicial. Whereas this problem will rise again 530 PAAES iii 383 (= sartre (1982a), p. 126 nr.8; moors (1992), p. 315 nr. 4b): Orooeou ouvoi xou voooev. 531 moors (1992), p. 3312. 532 moors (1992), p. 396401 and p. 4179. 533 PAAES iii 401a (= moors (1992), p. 315 nr. 4a). 534 see scharrer and Zangenberg (2005b) with further references. on the problem of deining a city see scharrer (2002b), p. 2835. 535 e.g. contini (1987), p. 49; de Vries (1986), p. 234; moors (1992), p. 284. see n. 504. 536 sartre (1985), p. 141 and p. 1478. 297 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east below with respect to palmyra, it is also a matter of debate with respect to bosra and other cities of the decapolis. 537 among the tribes known from city contexts are the Somaithenai and the Bitaieni, both from the polis soada, the name of the latter maybe having the semitic bit as a compound. With respect to these tribes it is noti- ceable that for both of them the ofice of an episcopus, an overseer, existed at soada. 538 one of these was cornelius palma, who under Trajan created the provin- cia Arabia, and who is also designated in the relevant inscription as antistrate- gos. 539 Unfortunately the exact relations between palma and the Bitaieni or So- maithenai is not clear. furthermore it cannot be said whether these tribes were civic tribes or, if not, whether they were nomadic groups at all. it therefore has to remain a matter of debate to what extent the ofice of an episcopus might resemble that of the overseer (nr) known from safaitic inscriptions. 540 it is possible that at least some of the inscriptions ought to be seen rather in the context of economic interaction, as discussed in the fouth section. Thus, against the background of the evidence so far no statement can be made about the extent to which the nomadic groups were socially and politically bound to these cities, and hence it is not clear whether it is reasonable to speak of dimorphic or at least seg- mentary societies. i have already argued that, apart from very few examples quoted, there is no evidence of attempts to settle nomadic groups in cities or villages. based on the interpretation of tribes and names at bosra, de Vries suggests that in the irst cen- tury ad local tribes settled at bosra under political control and with encourage- ment of the nabataean authorities. 541 so far, this hypothesis cannot be supported by any unambiguous evidence. The relation between the nabataeans and other ethnic groups, especially no- mads, is a question which has actually not been pursued in detail so far. much about the nabataeans themselves, besides much evidence on their culture, is still unclear, especially the question to what extent the nabataeans themselves are to be regarded as nomadic or at least of nomadic origin. 542 in any case, it has occasionally been stated that some of the groups known from the safaitic inscriptions and some wri- ters of Thamudic texts lived under the political inluence or control of the naba- taean kingdom. 543 Graf bases his notion mainly on three observations: irstly, the nabataean god -ar is being worshipped by writers of Thamudic and safaitic inscriptions steming from the nabataean realm; secondly, some of the writers ad- opted names of nabataean kings and queens; and thirdly, the idea is based on lin- 537 Tribes artiicial at bosra: e.g. macadam (1983), p. 111. Tribes preserving indigenous structu- res: e.g. bowersock (1991), p. 427; sartre (1982b), p. 85. on urban tribes of the decapolis with references: moors (1992), p. 28793 and p. 33841. on the distinction of different sorts of tribes see moors (1992), p. 2856; sartre (1982b), p. 878. 538 Somaithenai: IGRR iii 1276. Bitaieni: IGRR iii 1277. either of these tribes: IGRR iii 1273. The Somaithenai are also mentioned in IGRR iii 1213. 539 IGRR iii 1273. 540 Wh 2163. see above, n. 4712. 541 de Vries (1986), p. 234. 542 see the references in n. 42. 543 e.g. Graf (1989a), p. 36870; de Vries (1986), p. 2345. 298 Ulf scharrer guistic grounds, mainly the orthography of safaitic texts. 544 Whereas this evidence certainly reveals some sort interaction between the writers of safaitic and Thamu- dic inscriptions and nabataean groups, it cannot not be interpreted conclusively with respect to political and social interaction between nabataeans and nomadic tribes in the region. is it really appropriate to regard the worship of -ar as an example of political loyalty to the nabataeans? or does the use of nabataean phra- ses and orthography really reveal more than some sort of cultural inluence? even the very few safaitic-nabataean bilingual inscriptions do not necessarily have to be interpreted as evidence for the socio-political afiliation of their writers. 545 maybe the use of nabataean kings and queens names could be regarded as evidence of loyalty, but still it is not really clear whether the use of these personal names might have followed just a fashion and whether they at all had the nabataean names as a model. This evidence certainly reveals some interaction between the nabataeans and other ethnic groups. in the third section i briely discussed the palmyrene inscrip- tion of obaid/abidu who identiied himself as a nabataean and a ruhaean/ Raw. 546 as said above, dijkstra reads rawwaha, thus referring to a group known from safaitic inscriptions. his reading is supported by some nabataean in- scriptions mentioning the safaitic tribes of Raw, Salam
and Qaiu. 547 all these inscriptions come from the nabataean realm itself, the inscriptions mentioning the Raw and the Salam from Umm al-Jeml. interesting in this context is the hypoth- esis put foward by de Vries, that, against the background of the inscriptions and the fact that in the early roman stratum of the town there is a no distinctive nabataean pottery to be found, Umm al-Jeml mainly was not dwelled by nabataeans them- selves, but by nabataeanised arabs, thus implying some sort of sedentarization of the tribes just mentioned. from this he draws the conclusion that there was some kind of alliance between these groups and the nabataean authorities. 548 at least with respect to the Raw there seems to have been some, as obaid/abidu felt both nabataean and probably Raw. Thus certainly at least some nomadic groups formed an integral part of the nabataean empire. 549 however, in the fourth section i have discussed nomadic raids against the na- bataean empire. Therefore, while some nomadic groups might have lived in peace- ful coexistence with the nabataean empire, others apparently had rather hostile re- lations. in that section i also discussed the revolt of damas. if this was a revolt against the nabataeans, in this case nabataean rule was felt at least by some writers 544 Graf (1989a), p. 36870. 545 safaitic-nabataean bilinguals: e.g. Zeinaddin (2000), inscr.13. see macdonald (1993), p. 348 51. 546 see above, n. 1389. 547 Raw: PUAES iV a 43. Salam: PUAES iV a 44. Qaiu: PUAES iV a 11. on further refe- rences to these groups see n. 118. 548 de Vries (1986), p. 2345. 549 see dijkstra (1995), p. 41, sartre (2005), p. 2378 and macdonald (1991), p. 1068 on the fact of different ethnic groups within the nabataean kingdom. on a tribal structure of the naba- taeans see e.g. Goodman (1997), p. 260. 299 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east of safaitic inscriptions to be something foreign in any case they did not regard themselves as nabataeans in the way that obaid/abidu did. Thus, probably some segments of the nabataean kingdom can be regarded as having a dimorphic struc- ture. in addition, some sort of peaceful interaction must have existed also on the socio-political level besides probable antagonistic tendencies of some groups to which i have already referred. somehow dubious with respect to the question of dimorphic societies is the emesene society. according to strabo, its irst rulers in the irst century bc, samp- sigeramus and his son iamblichus, were both phylarchs of the ethnos of the Emese- noi. 550 according to cicero, iamblichus simply was a phylarch of the arabs (phyl- archus Arabum). 551 first, the term ethnos with respect to the Emesenoi is striking, since it is questionable whether it refers to the people of emesa or to a native ethnic group. emesa itself was a seleucid foundation. With respect to this it has to be stressed that seleucid cities seemed to have been settled to a considerable degree with indigenous people already in the hellenistic period. 552 it can therefore not be stated conclusively whether the dynasts of emesa emerged out of the population of emesa in the course of the inal seleucid decline in the irst century bc, or whether by some unknown process an ethnic group of a similar name like emesa the Greek Emesenoi occupied the city coming from outside. 553 against the background of the wide use of the term ethnos which was dis- cussed in the third section it is possible that the population of emesa at this time was a rather homogeneous civic group, though without the claim to common de- scent. in any case, the main seat of the dynasty at this time was arethusa to the north of emesa. 554 Thus, the phylarchs of the Emesenoi controlled some territory. in this context ciceros phrase should not be overinterpreted: as native arabians and ruling over cities probably settled at least by some arabs, from a roman point of view it seems quite appropriate to stress their arab identity. again it has to be emphasised that no speciic way of life of sampsigeramus, iamblichus and their subjects can be concluded from the phrase. 555 it has occasionally been stated that the emesene dynasts indirectly controlled desert tribes, 556 but there seems to be no direct evidence for this. Unfortunately not much is known about emesa and its relations to the surrounding territories in the hellenistic period, and we do not know anything either about nomadic groups li- ving in the vicinity of the emesene territory, although there might have been some. Therefore, not too many conclusions from the rather scarce evidence ought to be drawn. 550 strabo 16.2.10. on emesa see also the paper by Kropp in this volume. 551 cic. Fam. 15.1.2. 552 see scharrer (2006), p. 342, p. 3468 and p. 362, with references; sommer (2005), p. 228 n.15. 553 on the problem see sartre (2005), p. 334. 554 ball (2000), p. 34. see strabo 16.2.10. 555 according to rets (2003), p. 3545, they were nomads. 556 e.g. ball (2000), p. 34. sommer (2005), p. 59, counts emesa among those centres with a di- morphic structure. 300 Ulf scharrer maybe the process at emesa was somehow similar to the rise of the lords and kings of edessa. 557 like emesa, edessa was a seleucid foundation, possibly also largely populated with indigenous groups. furthermore, the process which in the second century bc eventually led to the establishment of abgarid rule cannot be traced in detail any more. 558 in this context there are mainly two approaches to ex- clear the genesis of edessene identity and rule. 559 according to the irst approach, nomad groups from outside settled in the city and established their rule. 560 in an- other approach sommer suggests to apply rowtons model of a dimorphic society to edessa: since the macedonian and indigenous settlers at edessa had to live from shepherding or trade they had to make arrangements with surrounding nomadic groups, and by ethnogenesis nomads and city dwellers became a group of common identity with edessa as the administrative centre. 561 so far none of these approaches can be proved by any evidence, and we should now have a further look at the evi- dence from the roman period. like the rulers of emesa, the lords of edessa were originally called by Greek authors phylarch, which likely corresponds to syriac mry (lord) known from syriac sources. 562 The Greek term in the irst instance reveals that at the beginning there was some sort of tribal organization at edessa. furthermore, festus calls the early edessene ruler phylarchus Saracenorum. 563 although this reference is anachronistic, 564 it is a matter of debate whether edessene rule at least at this time implied nomadic groups. however, it is not clear whether by some process of eth- nogenesis all edessenes and maybe even surrounding groups ought to be regarded as one tribe. furthermore the term, as well as the syriac word, does not imply the extent to which groups outside the city fell under the dominion of the ruler of edessa. 33 bc is the terminus post quem the rulers of edessa became kings, probably in the context of alliance with the parthian empire. 565 The irst edessene king to be named in roman literature is abgar V Ukkm, who is presented by Tacitus in ad 49 as rex Arabum. 566 While this designation certainly implies the rule over a larger 557 see sommer (2005), p. 22835. on the beginning of edessene kingship see luther (1999b). see also the paper by sommer in this volume. 558 see sartre (2005), p. 6; sommer (2005), p. 22830. on different families see luther (1999b), p. 4478. 559 on these approaches see sommer (2005), p. 230 n. 23. 560 drijvers (1980), p. 10; p. 17; sartre (2005), p. 33; segal (1970), p. 16. 561 sommer (2005), p. 2301. 562 see luther (1999b), p. 44852, followed by sommer (2005), p. 232 n. 32; sommer (2003a), p. 392. 563 festus, Breviarium 14. 564 bowersock (1994e), p. 389. 565 luther (1999b), p. 4512, followed by sommer (2003b), p. 392; sommer (2005), p. 232. 566 Tac. Ann. 12.12.2. see luther (1999b), p. 173 and p. 451. luther also quotes Tac. Ann. 12.14, but the relevant passage (12.14.1) does not name abgar explicitly as king, but just says that izates left with the adiabenian and soon abgar with the arabian army (Izates Adiabeno, mox Acbarus Arabum cum exercitu abscedunt). on the context of the passage see sommer (2005), p. 234. 301 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east territory beyond edessa itself, 567 again sedentary and nomadic arabs may be im- plied, as it certainly is by the frequent designation of the nabataean king ruling over sedentary and probably nomadic subjects as king of the arabs in Greek and latin literature. 568 Unfortunately there is no equivalent to this designation either in nabataean or in osrhoenean inscriptions, though it is found in the hatrean inscrip- tions discussed below. in this context the small corpus of inscriptions from sumatar, some 70 km sou- theast of edessa and dated to ad 1656, is of fundamental importance. 569 a couple of these inscriptions mentions a ly drb. 570 While in the third section i have briely discussed these inscripions with respect to the term Arab, here i will discuss the ofice itself. The exact purpose of the ofice of ly drb is not clear, 571 and different interpretations have been suggested. mostly the term ly has been translated as governor, and thus a common view is that the holders of the ofice simply con- trolled the bedouins of the osrhoene 572 or acted mainly as intermediaries between edessa and its arab sorroundings. 573 other interpretations suggest that the holders of the ofice were instead integrated in the native arab society. so luther seems to interpret them rather as native arab rulers being subject to the edessene king. 574
more explicit in this context is sommer, who interprets personal names constructed with bar combined with a reference to children, brothers and father in the inscrip- tion of Tiridates as relecting the integration of the governor of Arab into a tribal structure. furthermore no settlements are found in the near surroundings, and thus nomadic groups are to be assumed. sommer thus pledges for a social dimorphism in osrhoene. 575 in this context it is currently assumed that the osrhoenean ly drb resembles the ofice of an arabarches mentioned in a papyrus from dura-europus from ad 121, 576 which has been briely discussed with regard to the term Arab in the third section. apparently, this function is also known from ptolemaic papyri. 577 further- more cicero in a letter from 59 bc asks atticus to spy on a certain Theophanes to experience the attitude of an Arabarches towards him. 578 in this context Arabar- ches probably is an ironic designation for pompeius, and by this cicero either wants 567 on the problem of the extension of the kingdom of edessa see sommer (2005), p. 235. 568 e.g. Joseph. Ant. 14.15; 370; 16.220; 20.77; BJ 1.159; 181; 360; 487; cass. dio 37.15.1; proc. bell. 1.19.20. on the nabataeans as arabs see e.g. Joseph. BJ 1.187. on Petra in Arabia see e.g. Joseph. Ant. 14.80; BJ. 1.267; 4.454. 569 on the inscriptions and sumatar itself see ross (2001), p. 245; segal (1953), p. 97107; segal (1970), p. 23; sommer (2005), p. 2523. 570 drijvers and healey (1999), as36,1; as47,3; as49,23; as51,1; as52,4; add3,3. 571 see sommer (2003a), p. 223. 572 sartre (2005), p. 147. 573 ross (2001), p. 25. 574 luther (1997), p. 173. 575 sommer (2005), p. 2545. The inscription of Tiridates: drijvers and healey (1999), as36 (= dijkstra (1995), p. 253). 576 PDura 20,5; see n.224. on the resemblance see sommer (2005), p. 254. 577 see rets (2003), p. 4101; KlP, col. 4823 s.v. Arabarches (colpe). 578 cic. Att. 2.17.3. 302 Ulf scharrer to express pompeius authority over the arabs or to stress ironically an arab iden- tity of pompeius, calling him somewhat like the commander of the arabs. 579
Therefore the exact meaning of ciceros use of the loan-word cannot be stated un- ambiguously. The ofice of an arabarches mentioned in the dura papyrus itself is being held by a certain manesos, son of a phraates. besides being arabarches ma- nesos also was strategos of mesopotamia and parapotamia and had the function of a aooaotg, a term in this context dificult to translate, since the function of this ofice is not clear. 580 furthermore, manesos seems to have had different oficials under his direct command, such as the lender in PDura 20, the eunuch phraates. finally, manesos quite likely is of iranian, i.e. parthian origin, as his own and his fathers name indicate. Thus, manesos appears to have been a high iranian ofical at dura-europus. 581 so far the exact administrative or military function of the durene ofice is not clear. 582 segal writes that the main function of the ofice was the organization of protection of roads against arab attacks and the exercise of jurisdiction. 583 in con- trast to that, sommer, in analogy to his interpretation of the osrhoenean all deArab, suggests that the durene arabarches too indicates a dimorphic social structure at dura-europus. he bases his arguments on two observations: irst, se- leucus, a durene oficial known from a irst-century bc inscription, is known to have been genearches and strategos of the city. sommer regards the term genear- ches as resembling the term phylarchos, a sheikh. although he states clearly that seleucus and his successors claimed to belong to the macedonian leading class of dura, sommer suggests without further argument that seleucus, by being genear- ches, was also integrated into tribal contexts, assumingly nomadic surroundings of the city. sommer continues that as strategos of mesopotamia and parapotamia ma- nesos had control only over the territory of dura-europus, not a very large district, and he concludes that the strategies of seleucus and manesos had basically the same territorial extension. again, sommer continues, that seleucus and manesos likely had the same functions, and that both were integrated into tribal structures as tribal leaders, seleucus as genearch, manesos as arabarch. 584 sommers second observation is that one of the witnesses of the treaty in PDura 20, metolbaissa, was the grandson of the military commander and parthian ofical menarnaios. sommer irst interprets the names as semitic and thus steming from nomadic or local peasant milieus, and argues that the local oficials were ethnically and culturally distinct 579 The second view has been brought forward by rets (2003), p. 410. 580 on the problem see sommer (2005), p. 296, who interprets the ofice as a kind of Hofsene- schal, actually a term from medieval europe since the merovingians. on this ofice see e.g. halphen (1995), p. 143; lebecq (1990), p. 68; mitteis and lieberich (1992), p. 72; schneider (1995), p. 55. 581 see sommer (2005), p. 2989. 582 see millar (1998a), p. 477. 583 segal (1970), p. 223. 584 sommer (2005), p. 297300. see also sommer (2003a), p. 22. 303 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east from rather macedonian urban elites. both assumptions he interprets as showing the merging of tribal and bureaucratic structures. 585 of course, sommers hypothesis is not to be dismissed entirely, but it seems to be based on a number of assumptions which are at least debatable. first, it is not compulsory that a genearches was the same as a phylarchos. basically, both phyl- archos and genearchos could also have been ofices with regard to the political structure of a city itself. furthermore, it is by no means clear that the arabarches had the same function as the genearches beforehand, as sommer argues, namely that seleucus and manesos basically had the same scope of ofices, by rather dimi- nishing the title of strategos of mesopotamia and parapotamia. also, the names mentioned in PDura 20 are not necessarily of semitic origin. What the document shows, however, is that all those mentioned were integrated into the parthian elite. Thus it seems that sommer tries to prove his theory of a dimorphic structure at dura-europus by applying the necessary assumptions. 586 i therefore tend to the far less sophisticated view that the function of the arabarches might have been only the exercise of authority over sedentary and nomadic steppe dwellers, 587 or even more carefully said, that the holder of the ofice established relations of whatever kind with the neigbouring Arab populations. maybe he dealt with members of sa- faitic groups which as i said in the fourth section 4 are found quite often at dura, maybe he exercised some sort of military control, and maybe he did both. it also could be the case that the ofice was created within the context of a roman retreat from mesopotamia after the campaigns of Trajan, 588 thus in presumably a period of some turmoil. We do not seem to know any details for certain. at least manesos, the holder of the ofice, seems to have been a high parthian oficial, which might stress the importance added to dealing with Arab at least in this period. from the limited evidence it is not clear to what extent the durene arabarches really resembles the ofice of the osrhroenean all deArab. 589 indeed, so far at least one other all is known from osrhoenean inscriptions, a governor of birta, known from an inscription dated to ad 67. 590 sommer seems to suggest that birta and Arab are to be regarded as two distinctive administrative units: whereas he re- gards the governor of Arab as being integrated into a nomadic tribal society, the governor of birta, coming from completely different natural surroundings, was a governor of a certain district of administration. 591 it is then quite reasonable to as- sume that Arab in the inscriptions from sumatar does not refer to a clearly deined district of administration, but to the steppe and its dwellers. 585 sommer (2005), p. 3001. 586 see the brief criticism of this way of proceeding in Kaizer (2002), p. 264, followed by scharrer (2003), p. 75. 587 see rets (2003), p. 411. 588 see rets (2003), p. 439. on the eastern campaigns of Trajan see bennett (1987), p. 191203; dillemann (1962), p. 27386; halfmann (1994), p. 5817; sartre (2005), p. 1467. 589 see aggoula (1995), p. 756; ross (2001), p. 25. 590 drijvers and healey (1999), as55. 591 sommer (2005), p. 2535. 304 Ulf scharrer it is also certainly not that surprising that Tiridates, one governor of Arab, set up an altar among others for the lives of the king and his children, thus expressing his loyalty to the royal house at edessa. 592 of course it may be asked whether Tiri- dates might have been a native inhabitant of birta, but a deinite answer to this question is not to be found. furthermore, another governor of Arab, a certain barnabar, set up a statue for a freedman of antoninus ([n]twnyns) caesar, aurelius afsay (wrylws fsy). 593 probably the inscription dates to the years ad 17480, as the caesar, being called lord and benefactor in the inscription, is likely to be marcus aurelius antoninus, 594 which also is indicated by the freedmans name. aurelius apsay seems to have been an important igure in osrhoene in that period, since he is honoured by two more inscriptions from sumatar. 595 apparently, by ho- nouring a roman freedman, barnabar at the same time expressed his loyalty to rome, very likely in the time that edessa was ruled again by the pro-roman king manu Viii, after the interruption by the pro-parthian prince Waels seizure of po- wer in ad 162. 596 in fact, the ofice of a governor of Arab seems to have been in some connection with these events, since, as far the evidence is concerned, the of- ice was introduced in the context of Waels usurpation. 597 maybe the opponents wanted to secure Arab support. Thus, barnabar, with his expression of loyalty to rome, also demonstrated his support of manu Viii. so far there is nothing known about the role played by the Arab in this context: most likely it seems that they fol- lowed the political alliance of their all. in the context of the change of alliances a passage from cassius dio needs to be discussed briely. With respect to the events in ad 2123 dio writes that abgar, the king of osrhoene, rose to rule over kindred tribes (oouev) and that he was very cruel to their leaders (aorovtoi) and changed them to roman customs. 598
Very probably dio refers in this passage to abgar iX severus, who in ad 2123 ruled according to dio for just nine months, before edessa was turned into a colony by caracalla in the same year. 599 The question in the present context is what could have been implied by the terms oouev and aorovtoi. There are mainly three different interpretations: either this passage may be regarded as evidence of a somehow dimorphic or maybe even segmentary society. if read in this way, abgar forced the leaders of different tribes in the osrhoene and at edessa itself under his rule, the tribes being related by social ties with each other. it could also be read so that abgar asserted his power against outstanding people of his own or related fa- 592 drijvers and healey (1999), as36. see dijkstra (1995), p. 253; sommer (2005), p. 253. on the phrase for the life of , see generally dijkstra (1995). 593 drijvers and healey (1999), as49 with comments. see ross (2001), p. 25 594 sommer (2005), p. 255. 595 drijvers and healey (1999), as48; as50. see sommer (2005), p. 255. 596 on the problem of Wael, see ross (2001), p. 40. 597 see drijvers (1980), p. 12234; drijvers and healey (1999), p. 195; ross (2001), p. 401; sommer (2005), p. 253 n. 92. 598 cass. dio 78.12.1a. 599 sartre (2005), p. 149 and p. 344; sommer (2005), p. 2423. 305 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east miliy or tribe. finally, the terms might be interpreted simply as relating to the city of edessa itself and in this context maybe especially to civic tribes. Unfortunately none of these hypotheses can be proven. and it remains a matter of discussion why the osrhoene was turned into a colony. sommer suggests that the nomadic society of the osrhoene was undergoing a process of sedentarization and that rome therefore turned to the strategy of direct rule instead of indirect pow- er. 600 apparently, there is no evidence at all for an ongoing process of sedentariza- tion in the osrhoenean realm although in fact, as discussed briely in the third section, the beginning of a bedouinization process of the near east is assumed for this period. The (irst) annexation of the osrhoene probably stands in the context of roman and sasanid policy of turning the last client kingdoms into colonies, maybe in connection with the rise of sasanid power. so far there is no evidence that noma- dic groups in this context appeared in roman strategic thinking. so the evidence on nomad-sedentary socio-political bonds from the osrhoene is quite ambiguous. for certain, the inscriptions from sumatar reveal the associa- tion of the governor of Arab with the edessene king, be he pro-roman or pro- parthian. 601 The question is, however, whether the edessene kings just exercised indirect control over the Arab by a subordinate ofice, 602 or whether edessa was the centre of a tribal state within a dimorphic society. 603 if the notion of a dimorphic society is narrowed to the concept of steppe populations being controlled by a city centre, the evidence from sumatar is unambiguous with that respect, as the os- rhoenean steppe dwellers were controlled from the city. Whereas there certainly were socio-political relations, 604 it has to remain a matter of debate whether the osrhoene was an integrated dimorphic tribal society, as it seems to have been at hatra and its surroundings, to which i will turn now. it has been suggested that the osrhoenean ly drb resembles the hatrean rbyt dy rb, currently translated as majordomo of Arab, 605 or even the hatrean king of Arab. 606 The early urban development of hatra still remains enigmatic, as it is the case with most of the cities covered here. most commonly the sedentarization of segments of the nomadic population of the Jazirah is assumed as the reason for hatras urban growth. 607 Within this context, as at edessa, the development of titles is of some importance. first of all, like at edessa, the title of a mry (lord) became substituted by the title mlk (king), probably after ad 1512 and probably in the context of the campaigns of lucius Verus in ad 1616. 608 600 sommer (2005), p. 242. 601 see ross (2001), p. 25. 602 drijvers and healey (1999), p. 105. 603 sommer (2005), p. 59. see the references above. 604 see dijkstra (1995), p. 251. 605 dijkstra (1995), p. 253. on evidence see above, n. 222. 606 ross (2001), p. 25 n. 26. 607 see e.g. dijkstra (1995), p. 175; sommer (2005), p. 368. 608 see altheim and stiehl (196469) iV, p. 2657; dijkstra (1990), p. 967; dijkstra (1995), p. 17785; hartmann and luther (2002), p. 164; hauser (1998), p. 5023; hauser (2000), p. 189; Kaizer (2006b), p. 1478; luther (1999b), p. 44850; segal (1986), p. 604; sommer 306 Ulf scharrer so far, the title of the lord of the arabs (mry rby) is attested only once in the hatrean inscriptions, 609 besides many other references to lords in general. 610 in this context cassius dio refers to a certain mannus, who in ad 115 was phylarch of arabia near edessa. 611 There are some uncertainties about this mannus: sartre seems to regard him as an osrhoenian phylarch from sumatar under abgar Vii (reg. ad 10917). 612 however, the most prominent view is that the mannus of cas- sius dio was a hatrene lord, probably to be identiied with the lord man known from hatraean inscriptions. 613 if this is correct, the lord of hatra was regarded as some sort of tribal leader at least in Graeco-roman eyes, and this view is also sta- ted occasionally in scholarship: 614 dijkstra assumes that there may have been more than one lord of hatra at the same time, being tribal leaders. 615 according to som- mer the hatrene lord was some sort of primus inter pares in the elite of tribal pa- triarchs settling at hatra. 616 he stresses the existence of elders (qy), interpreted by him as evidence for some sort of tribal council, and the lord could also be an elder at the same time. 617 so far, neither view can be proven conclusively. at least before the introduction of kingship at hatra elements of a segmentary society can be found. in this context it should be stressed, that none of the known inscriptions menti- ons something like a lord of hatra: With the one above-mentioned exception, only the title of a general lord has come down to us. it is to some extent similar with the kingship at hatra: only the titles of the king or king of Arab/the arabs are known. 618 The titulature has been interpreted repeatedly as expressing a com- mon identity of hatra and its steppe surroundings. 619 This may be supported by a passage from abars History. The author writes that at hatra a certain sirn of the Qudaah from the clan of the Tazd b. ulwn ruled in the Jazira over many sub- tribes of the Qudaah. his kingdom in the time of shapur i is said to have extended as far as syria. 620 if this is the last hatrene king, sanatruq ii, 621 this would indeed (2003a), p. 2933; sommer (2003b); sommer (2005), p. 3704; 3813; Tubach (1986), p. 1969, p. 231 and p. 2467. see also dijkstra (1995), p. 3. 609 H78. 610 see the references in the works cited above, n.508. see also the references in hartmann and luther (2002), p. 164 n. 15. 611 cass. dio 68.21.1. 612 sartre (2005), p. 146. 613 see sommer (2003b), p. 3889 and p. 392; sommer (2005), p. 3734. 614 e.g. generally by hartmann and luther (2002), p. 1634. 615 dijkstra (1990), p. 97; dijkstra (1995), p. 181. 616 sommer (2003b), p. 3934. 617 sommer (2005), p. 379. 618 see aggoula (1994), p. 160. King of Arab / the arabs: H193,2; H194,12; H195,12 (= dijk- stra (1995), p. 228); H196 (?); H197,2; 4; H198,23; H199,23; H203,12; H287,45 (= dijk- stra (1995), p. 2301); H290,2 (= dijkstra (1995), p. 2023); H342 (= Kaizer (2006b), p. 143 4), 12 (?); H345,2; H347,2; H353,2; H370; H373; H375; H379; H018,5. 619 e.g. hauser (2000), p. 191; millar (1998a), p. 495; sommer (2003a), p. 22; sommer (2005), p. 379. 620 abar, Tarkh (History) i 827. 621 on the identiication see Zwettler (1993), p. 10. 307 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east indicate strong tribal ties between the ruler of hatra and steppe-dwellers, and thus the title king of Arab/the arabs would indeed express a common identity. in addition, repeatedly H79 2 has been considered as an important document, dating from probably right after ad 238. it testiies the erection of a statue for sa- natruq ii by two brothers, Yahbararyan and alkud, who name their genealogy down to the fourth generation. The inscription furthermore states, that the dedica- tors trust upon nara and the Gad of Arab, that mana, son of sanatruq, may not suppress them by force or, in another possible translation, that they will not do any harm to mana. in addition, the inscription mentions the possessions or the people of the dedicators outside and inside and the hope for remembrance in hatra and Arab. 622 Their ancestor amibarak is said by dijkstra to be the same person as a majordomo (rbyt) of this name mentioned in H336 and H343, as well as in H25. These inscriptions record a decision of the hatrenes and the arabs, that anyone stealing within or outside the citys wall shall be stoned. What could these inscrip- tions show? dijkstra reasonably interpretes them against a theoretical background of a dimorphic and segementary society: all persons mentioned thus represent people inside and outside hatra, that is the city and its Arab hinterland. 623 howe- ver, as dijkstra himself writes, H79 2 also records the end of a conlict between hatra and the steppe dwellers. 624 The division between hatra on the one hand and Arab on the other might allow the conclusion that at least at this time both parts where not a single political and social entity, 625 although the title of a king of Arab apparently tries to enforce that. in this context it is probable that the Gad of Arab referred to in the inscription is worshipped both by city- and steppe-dwellers. against this background it appears as rather dubious that cassius dios reference to the arabian cavalry as having assailed the army of septimius severus at hatra in ca ad 200 just implies nomads from outside hatra. 626 in the preceding section i already mentioned the ofice of a majordomo (rbyt). it has been debated whether the translation majordomo is appropriate: sommer stresses the literal meaning to be great of the house actually the literal meaning of major domus and thus suggests rather to translate administrator or principal. 627 it is a matter of question whether the function of the hatraean rbyt may have been similar to that of the safaitic nr, currently translated as overseer. 628
however, two hatrean inscriptions explicitly mention a majordomo/principal of Arab (rbyt dy rb). 629 dijkstra suggests, that also the rbyt in H336 and H343 is a 622 on the inscription in detail and its datation see caquot (1963), p. 25; dijkstra (1990), p. 81 90 and p. 934; Teixidor (1964), p. 2804. see also altheim and stiehl (196469) iV, p. 2435. 623 dijkstra (1990), p. 905 and p. 97. see also dijkstra (1995), p. 1838; hauser (1998), p. 513 4; hauser (2000), p. 1901; sommer (2003a), p. 368 and p. 401; sommer (2005), p. 3769; Zwettler (1993), p. 101. 624 dijkstra (1990), p. 93 and p. 97. see also sommer (2003a), p. 38. 625 see altheim and stiehl (196469) iV, p. 245; segal (1986), p. 60. 626 cass. dio 76.11.2, with the interpretation of sommer (2005), p. 369. on the emperors siege of hatra see Tubach (1986), p. 21623. 627 sommer (2005), p. 3767. 628 see above, n. 4712 and n. 540. 629 H223,2 (= dijkstra (1995), p. 3; 228); H364,2. 308 Ulf scharrer majordomo of Arab, 630 but this is not compulsory, as there could have been other realms of the ofice of the rbyt. 631 however, H336 and H343 do reveal that the rbyt could chair councils and probably act as an intermediator between conlicting parties. perhaps this was also one of the main tasks of the rbyt dy rb. apparently, the ofice of a rbyt could be exercised also by people dwelling in the steppe, as the reference to amibarak having been rbyt shows. 632 Thus, if the concept of a di- morphic society is appropriate at all, it certainly is with respect to hatra. This again is a matter of debate with regard to palmyra. an ethnic identity bet- ween Tadmoraeans/palmyrenes and nomadic groups has been assumed repeatedly for different periods of palmyrene history. Whereas with respect to the second mill- ennium bc this view is mainly based on an unlikely complement of a fragmentary tablet from mari and on an overinterpretation of a passage in the annals of Tiglat- pilesar i, 633 the idea of a somehow nomadic origin of the palmyrenes of the roman period is also quite common in scholarship. 634 This notion is based on different evidence. first, appians narrative on a raiding campaign of marcus antonius against palmyra in 41 bc is often interpreted in this direction, as the light of the palmyrenes carrying with them their removable possessions is regarded as expres- sing some sort of nomadic habit. 635 first the historicity of this passage seems to be doubtful. 636 in addition the whole narrative does not reveal anything about nomadic or semi-nomadic groups. 637 furthermore the worship of gods regarded as typical steppe deities has been interpreted as showing a rather recent sedentarization. 638
however, the division of nomadic and sedentary deities appears to be rather doubt- 630 dijkstra (1990), p. 90. 631 segal (1986), p. 645; sommer (2005), p. 379. 632 see sommer (2005), p. 379. on the ofice of majordomo see also Kaizer (2006b), p. 143. 633 The relevant passages of the mari tablet and of Tiglat-pilesars annals are quoted and discussed with references by scharrer (2002b), p. 30711 and p. 3168. sommer (2005), p. 150 n. 36 apparently misreads me when he states that in scharrer (2002b), esp. p. 3189, i suggest a di- morphic structure at second-millennium bc Tadmor on a thin basis of evidence ( der (ebd. 319) die bronzezeitliche oase als urbanen mittelpunkt einer dimorphen Gesellschaft cha- rakterisiert, freilich auf sehr dnner Quellenbasis.). in fact on p. 319 i am saying that against the background of the sparse material no far-reaching conclusions are to be drawn. in this con- text it is stated there that it cannot be said to what extent there was a dimorphic or polymorphic structure at Tadmor (die fragen nach dem Komplex polymorpher bzw. dimorpher struktu- ren knnen aufgrund des zugnglichen Quellenmaterials nicht beantwortet werden.). on the concept of a polymorphic society see scharrer (2002b), p. 296 with references. maybe my discussions of terminonolgy and approaches, in the context of second-millennium bc Tadmor probably a bit extensive (scharrer (2002b), p. 283301), somehow stimulated sommers inter- pretation of my views. 634 e.g. altheim and stiehl (196469) ii, p. 270; funke (1996), p. 222; Gawlikowski (2003), p. 89; matthews (1984), p. 169; sommer (2005), p. 180; staubli (1991), p. 118. 635 app. B. Civ. 5.9. The passage is quoted fully also in sommer (2005), p. 152 n. 39. on the inter- pretation see e.g. seyrig (1970), p. 89; sommer (2005), p. 180 n.156. see furthermore the refe- rences in hekster and Kaizer (2004), p. 71. see also millar (1993), p. 321; scharrer (2002b), p. 308. 636 hekster and Kaizer (2004). 637 see scharrer (2002b), p. 3089. 638 seyrig (1970), esp. p. 92. 309 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east ful. 639 finally the existence of different sorts of tribes at palmyra is seen as sho- wing at least a tribal origin of the palmyrene society, often equated with nomadic roots. 640 This view has been modiied by Kaizer, who convincingly argues that tri- bes were not restricted to nomadic groups. he furthermore points to the integration of palmyra and the villages of its hinterland and thus suggests as a hypothesis that through ecological conditions the city of palmyra developed in the context of an interplay with the surrounding villages. 641 however, the ecological circumstances and probable changes which may have led to a rather sudden urbanization are not clear, 642 and i would thus like to modify Kaizers hypothesis by stressing probable economic and political developments, which might have led to an urbanization of palmyra. however, so far the concept of a rather prompt sedentarization of no- madic tribes at palmyra seems to stand on uncertain grounds. in this context it is noticeable that none of the palmyrene tribes are known from other regions. sommer stresses, however, that the palmyrene bny tym are also known from inscriptions from hatra and the hauran. although he admits that tym and tymw are quite common names and the term bny in some cases could also refer to families, he suggests family ties between hatra and palmyra. as evidence for this he also interprets palmyrenean inscriptions from hatra. based on this quite ambiguous evidence sommer states that there were strong ties between nomads and sedentaries in the palmyrene. although he clearly says that the idea of a palmyrene militia or desert police is a modern presumption, which is not based on any direct evidence, he assumes its existence by the presence of palmyrene archers at the euphrates and the fact that caravans were protected. against the background of these two assumptions sommer states that the palmyrene militia were recruited among nomadic tribal relatives of the palmyrenes, and as a support for this hypo- thesis he refers furthermore to the dislocation and equipment of the militia a mi- litia, whose existence is not really certain. sommer continues with assuming that the strategoi of the militia probably were recruited among the nomad elites. he re- gards the strategoi as having a double function, being nomad cheikhs and urban oficers. from all these assumptions he draws the conclusion that similarily to ha- tra there was a dimorphic society at palmyra. 643 in addition, the safaitic inscriptions from the palmyrene have been interpreted along similar lines: according to seyrig the writers of these inscriptions were part of the sedentarised population. 644 altheim and stiehl conclude from the inscrip- 639 see Kaizer (2002), p. 567. 640 Gawlikowski (2003), p. 89; hartmann (2001), p. 467; matthews (1984), p. 169; sommer (2005), p. 1801. following the idea of tribal origins, but stating clearly that this does not mean necessarily nomadic roots: dirven (1999), p. 227. see also the critical discussion in Kaizer (2002), p. 4355. against this view see also scharrer (2003), p. 73. 641 Kaizer (2002), p. 513. on the palmyrene see schlumberger (1951); millar (1993), p. 299. 642 see scharrer (2003), p. 73. 643 sommer (2005), p. 155, p. 17881, p. 207, p. 2123, p. 216, p. 218 and p. 222. The idea that a part of the palmyrene urban elite was made up of bedouin chieftains is also stated by dirven (1999), p. 21, and staubli (1991), p. 118. already in sommer (2003a), p. 43, palmyrene society is characterized as dimorphic. 644 seyrig (1970), p. 82. 310 Ulf scharrer tions that nomads were in the army of palmyra. 645 as said in the fourth section, the evidence from the palmyrene and palmyra itself in the irst instance shows that there were some relations, appararently mainly economic. Thus the assumption of a dimorphic society at palmyra, as at dura-europus, is mainly based on presumpti- ons which are not at all relected unambiguously in the evidence. besides, as i have also discussed in the fourth section, the Greek section of the bilingual in honour of oglu refers to campaigns against the nomads. 646 sommer writes correctly that the inscription falls into the period of the parthian campaign of septimius severus. 647
it is not stated in the text that oglus campaigns took place in this context, but it rather seems the case that the campaigns were on behalf of palmyra itself. howe- ver, the lack of a palmyrenean equivalent to nomads in the bilingual is interpreted by asad and Yon as showing an intention on the palmyrenean side not to speak about victories over nomads in a language they could understand. 648 Unfortunately it is not known which nomads exactly were fought against, and therefore the extent of antagonism between nomadic groups and palmyra with respect to ca ad 200 is not clear. sommer states that the palmyrene caravan inscriptions throughout draw a misleading picture of nomads as foreigners and enemies. 649 as i have said in the fourth section, there is only the oglu-inscription which explicitly draws such a picture. however, palmyrene relations with nomadic groups can certainly not be reduced to simple antagonism. With respect to the question of a common ethnic and social identity of palmy- renes and nomadic groups, it has been stressed already that there is no equivalent known from palmyra to the hatraean king of Arab/the arabs. on the contrary, the honorary title Arabicus Maximus of queen Zenobias son Vaballathus from ca ad 270 expresses a socio-political distinction, if not antagonism to arab steppe dwel- lers. 650 The mention of this year, actually the fall of palmyra, leads to the problem of its famous queen Zenobia. Whereas her ancestry is wideley discussed, 651 the is- lamic tradition, and here especially abar, presents her under the name of al-Zabb as stemming from nomadic origins, and consequently abar describes the war against palmyra and its eventual fall completely as a tribal conlict: her father amr b. arib, ruler of a territory from the Jazirah to the fringes of syria, was slain during an attack by Gadhima. Zenobia revenged her father by killing Gadhima, after she had offered him in vain to join their lands. 652 of course it is not clear to what extent abars narrative is to believed literally: 653 while Zenobia after the defeat of pal- myra was brought to rome by aurelian, abar writes that she was killed in re- 645 altheim and stiehl (196469) ii, p. 2723. 646 see above, n. 349. see furthermore millar (1993), p. 3323. 647 sommer (2005), p. 206 n. 249. 648 asad and Yon (2001), p. 63. 649 sommer (2005), p. 179. 650 ILS 8924. Kaizer (2002), p. 578. see also Yon (2003), p. 15. Generally with respect to palmy- rene inscriptions: sommer (2005), p. 131; hartmann (2001), p. 634. 651 see e.g. ingholt (1976), p. 1367. 652 abar, Tarkh (History) i 75661. 653 abars narrative about Zenobia is taken literally e.g. by ball (2000), p. 7885. see also roth- stein (1899), p. 37. on abars narrative see equini schneider (1993), p. 4552. 311 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east venge for the murder of Gadhima. 654 furthermore, he omisses completely the ro- man part in the fall of palmyra. against this background also Zenobias nomadic descent is rather questionable. if there is some truth in this, some sort of dimor- phism with respect to Zenobias rule might be assumed. however, besides the legendary traces abars narrative may be relevant irst with respect to the arab allies of Zenobia. 655 according to the Historia Augusta Zenobia was allied with the saracens and the armenians. 656 Whereas the Historia Augusta does not say anything about the exact ethnic identy of Zenobias saracen allies, abar writes that her army in the ight against Gadhima consisted of rem- nants of the amliq and proto-arabs, furthermore the Tazd, the li and some Quah. 657 apparently, some of these represent groups already dwelled in the re- gion before the arrival and rise of the Tankh. Therefore some sort of ethnic con- lict may have been involved in the war of rome against palmyra. 658 however, it seems to be rather inappropriate to reduce this to a tribal conlict. 659 it is apparent that palmyrene rule at least at this time extended also over nomadic groups, as seems relected by a remark of procopius calling Zenobias husband odaenathus ruler of the saracens living in the region. 660 While this remark together with abars narrative on the origins of Zenobia/al-Zabb might be interpreted as indi- cating some sort of a dimorphic society at palmyra, it rather seems that both the Historia Augusta and abar present saracens or, as the case may be, arab groups as allies of palmyra, 661 which maybe were won by aurelian, to which i shall turn a bit later. in this context the role of safaitic tribes needs to be discussed briely. in the fourth section i have sketched probable economic and religious relations of safaitic people with palmyra, and it was said there that there is hardly any evidence on con- lict. Graf suggests intimate connections and he states that at least some safaitic tribes, such as the important group of the Aw, might have been allied with pal- myra and its queen against rome. This suggestion is based on the assumption that the safaitic inscriptions equate media with palmyra, and Graf thus interprets the references to a roman-median war as evidence for palmyras struggle with rome, stating that at least some writers of the safaitic inscriptions were friendly to Zeno- bia. 662 indeed, besides general references to medes in some safaitic inscriptions, 663
one inscription mentions a rebellion against rm in the year the medes came to 654 abar, Tarkh (History) i 766. on Zenobia in the triumph of aurelian at rome see sha Aurel. 34.3. 655 on problems of abar see hartmann (2001), p. 34950; millar (1993), p. 4323. 656 sha Aurel. 27.4. 657 abar, Tarkh (History) i 757. 658 on the li see bowersock (1994c), p. 135; hartmann (2001), p. 342; sartre (1982a), p. 146 9; shahd (1989), p. 2447. 659 Thus done apparently by ball (2000), p. 78. on the conlict see bowersock (1983), p. 1337. 660 procop. Bell. 2.5.5. 661 see hartmann (2001), p. 276; sommer (2005), p. 169. 662 Graf (1989b), followed by ball (2000), p. 79, and partly by equini schneider (1993), p. 68. see also Graf (1989a), p. 392. 663 e.g. SIJ 78; 88. 312 Ulf scharrer bosra. 664 a further inscription states that a certain ain of the aif acted as guide in the year caesar ejected the medes. 665 finally, an inscription refers to booty being made in the year of the war of rm against the medes. 666 The latter inscrip- tion can actually be used only as evidence of nomad raiding. Whether the war of rm and the medes provided good opportunities for this may be a matter of debate. more interesting are the references to the rebellion and the guide. it is quite pro- bable that the campaign of the medes provided a good opportunity for rebellion against roman rule. The acting as a guide by ain is more dificult to interpret, since it is not clear for whom he did this, whether it concerned roman or median forces or whether it took place in a very different context, maybe that of caravan trade. however, Grafs equation of the safaitic medes with palmyra appears to be rather speculative. 667 What can be read from the inscriptions is that apparently in periods of roman weakness or trouble some safaitic groups tried to escape roman rule. The mentions of medes could also refer to persian campaigns, e.g. in 40 bc, ad 260 or even ad 614, the middle date being the most likely. 668 as indicated by abar there was some conlict between palmyra and the Tankh already before the roman campaign against palmyra. probably there were some palmyrene ights with the Tankh in the hauran, likely in the context of the westward extension of Tankh power under Gadhima and the palmyrene occupa- tion of arabia, 669 and it is likely that already odaenathus struggled with arab no- mads. 670 i have suggested above that Zenobias arab/saracen allies probably consi- sted of groups which eventually became incorporated into Tankh power, and thus their alliance might have been directed at least to some extent against the growing power of the Tankh, actually the opponents of palmyra. in this context it is hence a matter of debate who exactly the saracens were that aurelian, according to the Historia Augusta, could bring on his side by force and diplomacy. 671 it is not clear, whether among these were groups mentioned speciically as allies of Zenobia by abar. probably this passage refers to an alliance between aurelian and the Tankh based on the common interest of war against palmyra. it seems as if aurelian could more or less easily win these saracens. on the other hand aurelian in his triumph at rome after his victories had among other prisoners of war Saracens being led. 672
Unfortunately it is not clear who these Saracens exactly were. it might be assumed that they stemmed from those groups supporting Zenobia, probably some of the tribes mentioned by abar. 664 SIJ 78. 665 SIJ 88. 666 CIS V 4448. 667 see hartmann (2001), p. 2767. 668 cf. Graf (1989b), p. 153; moors (1992), p. 311. according to dussaud (1955), p. 140, the in- scriptions refer to the persian war of ad 614. 669 see equini schneider (1993), p. 47 and p. 689; hartmann (2001), p. 27881 and p. 349; moors (1992), p. 309. 670 hartmann (2001), p. 194. 671 sha Aurel. 28.2. 672 sha Aurel. 33.4. 313 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east To what extent the other saracens, probably the Tankh, were decisive in the inal fall of palmyra is a matter of debate. 673 however, in this context maybe the title of Vaballathus as Arabicus Maximus becomes clearer: The title may either re- fer to Vaballathus conquests in the provincia Arabia, 674 or his campaigns were di- rected against those arab groups hostile to palmyra, probably those being allied to rome or the Tankh. less likely then is the idea that Vaballathus just campaigned against nomads raiding palmyrene territory, probably being in persian service. 675
Thus at palmyra, at least in Zenobias time, antagonism can be found and, if not really symbiosis, at least an alliance which became shattered eventually by the fall of palmyra. from all which up to now has been said, certain aspects of the problem of no- madic allies have become obvious: nomadic groups existed in interaction with the sedentary populations and especially to regional powers, i.e. the roman and per- sian client states. 676 besides economic symbiosis there is also strong evidence for socio-political bonds. as i have tried to show, however, it is rather inappropriate to apply the concept of a dimorphic society to all regional powers alike. Whereas ha- tra certainly can be described as such, the application of the concept appears to be debatable in the cases of edessa and emesa, and quite unlikely with respect to pal- myra. against this background it can for example not be said for certain to what extent the ofices of the hatrean rbyt dy rb, the osrhoenean ly drb and the du- rene arabarches resemble each other. 677 at least it seems unlikely, that the docu- ments which have been discussed here resound the control over Arab as a hostile element, as occasionally has been stated. 678 in contrast, the steppe seems to have been more or less integrated in regional political structures, the degrees of integra- tion spanning from a dimorphic society at hatra to alliances of palmyra. being so- cially and politically more or less bound to regional powers, many nomads and other steppe dwellers apparently followed their political centres in their alliances with the great powers, rome and persia: up to aurelians successful efforts to win saracen allies of Zenobia, there are no alliances or othere political actions known, which nomadic groups might have pursued independently from their relevant cen- tres, be it emesa, edessa, hatra or palmyra. in this context the question may be raised to what extent an explicit roman strategy of indirect control of steppe dwellers by regional powers, i.e. client king- doms, actually existed, a view which has been stated repeatedly with respect to 673 That the saracen allies of rome were decisive has been suggested e.g. by bowersock (1983), p. 137; Graf (1989b), p. 150. against this view e.g. hartmann (2001), p. 382 n. 83. see ball (2000), p. 801 and p. 85. 674 Thus stated by Teixidor (2005), p. 2023. 675 Thus suggested by hartmann (2001), p. 268. 676 see Kennedy and riley (1990), p. 36; shahd (1984b), p. 31. 677 in favour of a resemblance see sommer (2005), p. 379, stating, that the hatraean rbyt dy rb resembles the arabarches at palmyra. since the ofice is not known from palmyra, this is pro- bably just an accidental error. see also above, n. 576, n. 589 and n. 6056. against the re- semblance of the ofices see e.g. dijkstra (1995), p. 253. 678 millar (1998a), p. 512. see also sommer (2003b), p. 396; Teixidor (1964), p. 283. against this view e.g. hauser (1998), p. 512. 314 Ulf scharrer different regional powers, especially palmyra. 679 against the background of the fourth section this view appears to be debatable: as a considerable threat to the east- ern roman empire posed by nomadic groups seems not to have existed, the control over steppe dwellers is not likely the main purpose of the institution of client king- doms, the more so when, if isaac is right, nomadism in the near east was actually never the dominating culture. 680 if in addition probable tribal bonds between no- mads and villages and possibly some cities on the very local level are considered, it looks as if socio-political control already existed to a considerable degree. 681 Thus the main purpose of the client kingdoms certainly was the function of buffers and allies against the parthian and to some degree to the sasanid empires. 682 alliances before ca ad 300 against this background it is not surprising that there is actually not so much evi- dence on nomadic groups directly allied either to rome or parthia before the rise of Tankh power. The irst references on arab groups as allies in roman contexts are to be found in the evidence on the eastern campaigns of lucullus. 683 according to plutarch, Tigranes of armenia gathered among others arabs against lucullus. 684
probably after roman successes against Tigranes, kings of the arabs are reported to have offered lucullus their support against Tigranes. 685 eventually plutarch states that lucullus could gain the territory up to the red sea by the support of the arabian kings. 686 Unfortunately it is not clear whether all the arabs mentioned by plutarch belonged to nomadic groups. however, it seems probable that at least some of them did. Whereas plutarch does not give any details on the arabs, at least one arab ally is known from other sources. cassius dio reports that the arabian dynast alchaudonius in 69 bc offered his alliance to lucullus. 687 if, as suggested above, he is to be identiied with strabos alchaedamnus, the king of the nomadic rhambaeans, he would be the irst nomad ally of rome explicitly known. luckily, there is further evidence on alchaudonius / alchaedamnus conduct after his alliance with lucullus, and this its well with the remark just made, na- mely that lucullus victories were decisive for the local dynasts offering their sup- 679 With respect to palmyra: hartmann (2001), p. 85, p. 98 and p. 427; petit (1971), p. 123; sartre (1991), p. 69; shahd (1984b), p. 224. With respect to palmyra and the nabataean kingdom: bowersock (1983), p. 155. With respect to the nabataean kingdom: Gichon (1991), p. 320; sartre (1991), p. 64 (= sartre (1997), p. 55). With respect to emesa: ball (2000), p. 34. With respect to hatra: sommer (2003b), p. 396. Generally: sartre (1991), p. 31 (= sartre (1997), p. 27); sommer (2005), p. 64. 680 isaac (1998f), p. 4112. 681 on a coexistence see also shahd (1984b), p. 31. 682 see Wiesehfer (1982), p. 43940. 683 on lucullus eastern campaigns see dillemann (1962), p. 2638; sartre (2005), p. 357. 684 plut. Vit. Luc. 25.6. 685 plut. Vit. Luc. 29.5. 686 plut. Vit. Comp. Luc. 3.2. 687 cass. dio 36.2.5. 315 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east port: cassius dio explicitly states that alchaudonius attached himself always to the stronger party. corresponding to that he revolted when crassus parthian cam- paign in 53 bc turned out to be a disaster. 688 according to strabo alchaedamnus is to be found among the allies of caecilius bassus, a follower of pompey during the civil War. strabo relates that originally he was a friend of the romans, but at some point regarded himself to be treated unjustly by rome and thus retired to mesopo- tamia and became a mercenary in bassus service. 689 if alchaedonius and achae- damnus are identical, the supposed unjust treatment might have been a consequence of his foresaking of cassius. at least already at this early time it is clear that tribal leaders, and among them probably nomadic chiefs, tried to obtain their advantage by attaching themselves to the apparently strongest power. similarily might have been the conduct of other groups of which the nomadic element is not clear: Thus cicero in 51/50 bc states that the emesene phylarch iamblichus is to be regarded as a good friend of our state, and this he showed at least by reporting to cicero, at this time governor of cilicia, that pacorus, the son of the parthian king orodes, had crossed the euphrates. 690 in the civil War iamblichus and his father, together with other phylarchs, were allied to caecilius bassus, and this was actually one reason why bassus could stand a long siege being encircled at apamea. 691 With respect to allies, strabo remarks that the phylarchs and their tribes along the euphrates are selfwilled. he continues that some phylarchs there attach them- selves to the parthians, others to the romans. among these, nomadic tent-dwellers (skenitai) near the euphrates are rather not attracted by rome, whereas the tent- dwellers towards the west are. 692 Unfortunately no more details are known. it was probably one of the functions of the arabarches at dura-europus, as discussed above, to deal at least with some of these groups. at least parthia, so far as the evi- dence goes, in contrast to rome, did have an ofice designed explicitly to deal with relations with the steppe dwellers. again, the inscription of rawwfa is problematic. in the third section i have discussed the question of whether a military unit or a Thamd confederation is re- ferred to. furthermore the inscription states that antistius adventus had made peace among the Thamd (wrmhm). 693 according to bowersock, the phrase wrmhm refers to intertribal conlicts, and thus the governor of the province apparently acted as peacemaker among the tribes. 694 parker argues that this has to be seen in the context of security troubles caused by nomadic tribes on the fringes of the empire, and besides the threat of roman forces there was also diplomacy, at rawwfa the securing of peace. 695 Graf furthermore writes that by the introduction of emperor 688 cass. dio 40.20.1. 689 strabo 16.2.10. 690 cic. Fam. 15.1.2 (amicum esse rei publicae nostrae). see Grouchevoy (1995), p. 110. 691 strabo 16.2.10. 692 strabo 16.1.278. see funk (1996), p. 2234. 693 inscription (see n. 179) b4. 694 bowersock (1975), p. 517. see also Graf (1997b), p. 172 and p. 178; isaac (1992), p. 239; sartre (1982a), p. 130; sartre (1997), p. 317. 695 parker (2002), p. 78. see also Graf (1978), p. 11. 316 Ulf scharrer worship at rawwfa, a central place of the Thamd, they became foederati of ro- me. 696 especially after the parthian campaigns of lucius Verus a couple of inscrip- tions, especially in the syrian steppe, attest to the worship and honouring of mar- cus aurelius antoninus and lucius aurelius Verus. 697 The inscription from rawwfa is the only bilingual of these so far. The latter points might to some extent be put in contrast to macdonalds above- quoted argument, 698 namely that the inscriptions and the shrine from rawwfa were set up by a Thamd military unit: if so, why was it a bilingual? how could the role of antistius adventus as peacemaker be understood? if macdonald is right, however, the rawwfa inscription could not be used as evidence for nomadic al- lies, since irstly, as stated above, it is not clear to what extent the Thamd themsel- ves were nomadic, and secondly the relation to rome would not be exactly ob- vious: it cannot be said whether the Thamd have to be regarded as a conquered people, as allies or simply as a rather independent group from which auxiliaries could be recruited. if the irst interpretation of the inscription is correct, it still can hardly be stated conclusively whether rawwfa was a part of the roman sphere, i.e. of the provincia Arabia, or not. 699 following the notion of limes as a zone of contact, as discussed in the fourth section, this question seemingly is not that im- portant, since rawwfa was certainly to be found within this zone. in this case at least roman inluence on and diplomatic relations to the steppe would be attested once more. The problem of the rawwfa inscription leads to the aspect of probable auxi- liaries in the roman and parthian armies. it has repeatedly been stated that on the regional level nomads were employed by the roman and probably parthian autho- rities for the protection of the frontier, especially against raids of other nomadic groups or other enemies. 700 in this context the idea of client tribes has been brought into discourse, the most important of which are stated to be the Aw. 701 in addi- tion butcher suggests that dominant tribes furthermore had the task of collecting tribute from other tribes and in their areas of inluence on behalf of rome. 702 The notion of the Aw being a client tribe of rome is more or less explicitly based on 696 Graf (1978), p. 112. on rawwfa as a central place of the Thamd see issac (1998a), p. 125 n. 10. see also sartre (1982a), p. 35. 697 CIS V 2314; IGRR iii 1113; 1125; PUAES iii a 4; 11; 803; SEG XVi 1641; bowersock (1994d). on the campaigns of lucius Verus see e.g. angeli bertinelli (1976), p. 2530; christ (1992), p. 3346; eadie (1967), p. 141; Gebhardt (2002), p. 1269, p. 1527 and p. 1623; Goodman (1997), p. 73; millar (1993), p. 1113; ross (2001), p. 379; sartre (2005), p. 146 8; Ziegler (1964), p. 1134. 698 see n. 194. 699 bowersock (1986), p. 112; Graf (1997b), p. 17982; Kennedy (2004), p. 41; millar (1993), p. 140; shahd (1984b), p. 29. on the discussion see bawden e.a. (1980), p. 73. 700 e.g. dabrowa (1991), p. 3656; dussaud (1907), p. 5; Graf (1978), p. 45; nicolle (1996), p. 92; rothstein (1899), p. 127; sartre (1991), p. 69; shahd (1984b) p. 31 and p. 33; Wells (1991), p. 480. 701 on client tribes in general see Wagner (1985), p. 28. on the Aw as probably being an impor- tant client tribe see sartre (1991), p. 333 (= sartre (1997), p. 316); shahd (1984b), p. 31. 702 butcher (2003), p. 64. 317 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east a Greek inscription from rma set up for a certain odaenathus, strategos of the Aw and phylarch (ototgygoovti Aouiogvev xoi uogoovti). 703 accor- ding to sartre, odaenathus had a double function being chief of the Aw and head of a military contingent of this tribe. 704 since the inscription was set up by his wife and his father, it might be assumed that the early death of odaenathus could have been in the context of his military duties, but this of course is by no means certain. Unfortunately the date of the inscription is not clear, and thus it cannot be stated conclusively whether odaenathus and his contingent were in nabataean, roman or other service. its exact function, however, is not clear. There is no evidence that the Aw or other ethnic groups collected tribute, etc. furthermore, in the fourth sec- tion i have sketched probable revolts of the Aw against rome. it is not clear whether the tribe or its leader(s) changed their attitude towards rome because of political circumstances or whether only a segment of the group revolted. Unfortu- nately the importance of the Aw as allies is not clear, since the evidence just stems from members of this group themselves. below i shall deal in some more detail with the problems of the terms phylarch and strategos, which will show that it might also be a matter of debate whether the term strategos necessarily suggests a military function. however, there is quite a lot of evidence on arab troops in the roman army. in the irst instance there are dromedary units. a number of latin and Greek inscripti- ons attest the presence of dromedarii in syria, as there are for example the Ala I Ulpia Dromedariorum and the Ala Valeria Dromedariorum. 705 an inscription from bostra refers to equites singulares exercitus Arabici, item dromedarii. 706 Unfortu- nately these texts do not tell us where the dromedarii were recruited. dabrowa suggests, that many dromedar riders might have been recruited among arab tribes under roman rule. 707 bowersock suggests that the personnel of the dromedary units mainly were nabataeans. 708 indeed there are some nabataean inscriptions, which testify to members of a nabataean guard in the hejaz. however, these texts are probably from the pre-annexation period. 709 Graf suggests that the dromedary units were installed after the fall of the nabataean kingdom and recruited mainly from nabataeans. 710 furthermore, there are also some palmyrene forces of drome- darii. 711 Therefore, the recruitment of nomads in the dromedarii seems not to have been a dominant feature. however, this does not mean that there were no nomads in these units. Two inscriptions from namra refer to a dromedarios, one to a Thaim, 703 OGIS 617 (= sartre (1982a), p. 124 nr. 5; moors (1992), p. 316 nr. 2d). 704 sartre (1982a), p. 124. on the problem of the inscription see millar (1993), p. 42930. 705 Ala I Ulpia: CIL XVi 106. Ala Valeria: ILS 2541 (= CIL iii 123 = CIL iii 14160 1 ). see brown (1941), p. 1489. on other dromedarii see Graf (1997b), nrs. 2; 5; 6. 706 CIL iii 93 (= PUAES iii a 528). 707 dabrowa (1991), p. 365. on the problem of recruitment see pollard (2000), p. 11142. 708 bowersock (1983), p. 157. 709 Graf (1997b), nr. 21. see Graf (1997b), p. 1756. a veteran of the army of an arethas is also known from PUAES iii a 211. 710 Graf (1997c), p. 269. 711 CIL iii 123 (= CIL iii 14160,1); CIL iii 93; CIL XVi 106. see dabrowa (1991), p. 364. 318 Ulf scharrer son of sidmos, the other to a Gaddos. 712 in the fourth section i have suggested that namra probably was at least an ecomonic centre for nomadic groups. it is there- fore possible that both were members of nomadic groups dwelling in the region, but it is also possible that they rather lived a sedentary life. it thus seems inappro- priate to regard the dromedarii as units mainly drawn from nomadic allies. This may be supported by the statement in the third section, that at least writers of the safaitic inscriptions rather used the horse for ighting. The other important group of auxiliaries to be considered here are bowmen, the sagittarii. shahd states that most often the desert warrior, i.e. the eques sagittarius, was used for patrolling and controlling the frontier. 713 of course this seems to be quite probable, as bowmen are quite often depicted in the safaitic grafiti. Quite often eastern cohortes sagittarium are attested in latin inscriptions without any details on recruitment. 714 at bingen near the rhine the Cohors I Sagittarium was stationed. among its soldiers two syrians are found, one crete and one sidonian, 715
and thus this unit was ethnically mixed. other inscriptions attest to the ethnic ori- gins of some units, and here are to be found mainly syrians, furthermore ascaloni- tes and apamaeans. 716 so far, among the sagitarii there is no recruitment explicitly among nomadic groups known, although this remains possible. of some importance are a number of Greek inscriptions which attest the ser- vice of natives in the army, as may be judged by the semitic names of their writers or their relatives. 717 among these is also at least one native of the Legio III Cyre- naica, a certain sulain, whose son arabianus is said to have been a member of the governors staff (oixioiou tg gyrovio). 718 furthermore, a certain ai (Ero), son of cassianus, who was magister, is recorded to have erected a gateway 712 Thaim: IGRR iii 1259; Gaddos: PUAES iii a 747. 713 shahd (1984b), p. 33. 714 e.g. the Cohors I Sagittarium miliaria Gordiana in dacia (CIL iii 6279; 8018); the Cohors I Aelia Caes(ariensis) miliaria sagittariorum equitata from Klosterneuburg (roman cannabi- aca) (CIL iii 564546; XVi 76; 96; 97); the Cohors I Sagittarum in syria (AE 1995, 1569); the Cohors III sagittarium at apamea and later in latium (CIL iii 335; CIL XiV 3955); the Cohors I Ulpia sagittarium (equitata), which took part in the parthian war of ad 1616 (CIL iii 600, with brown (1941), p. 230. on these units see brown (1941), p. 22834. 715 CIL Xiii 751215; 11962a. syrians: CIL Xiii 7512; 11962a. crete: CIL Xiii 7513. sidonian: CIL Xiii 7514. 716 e.g. the Numerus Syrorum sagittariorum in dacia (CIL iii 8032; 12601a); the Cohors I Syrorum sagittariorum miliaria in mauretania (CIL Viii 21038; XVi 73); the Ala II Syrorum sagittariorum miliaria civium Romanorum (CIL XVi 73); the Cohors I miliaria nova Seve- riana Surorum sagittarium (CIL iii 363839; 10581; 15170); the I Ascalonit(arum) sag(ittaria) in syria (CIL XVi 106.); the Cohors I Apamenorum Sagittariorum equitata (BGU 462,56; ILS 2724). furthermore see the numeri Syrorum in moesia (CIL iii 7493) and in mauretania (CIL Viii 9381; 9962; 9964; 10469). on syrians in the roman army and these units see brown (1941), p. 24455. 717 IGRR iii 1304; 1307; 132931; 1337; PUAES iii a 284; 785 1 ; peek (1955), nr. 375 (= merkel- bach and stauber (2002), nr. 22/39/01. on this inscription see above, section 3). Legio III Cy- renaica: PUAES iii a 349; 795 6 ; 797 4 . 718 PUAES iii a 795 5 . 319 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east and a upper hall at Umm al-Jeml. 719 These inscriptions, however, do not allow the unequivocal conclusion that their writers had nomadic origins. There are some more inscriptions referring to soldiers bearing roman names who were married to women with semitic names, two of which were fround at namra. 720 While nothing can be said about the ethnic background of the soldiers, it may be possible that their wives stem from the nomadic surroundings of namra. more important in the present context are some inscriptions mentioning troops recruited from certain tribes. Thus, an inscription from ad 208 records the building of a monument for Guthth(l)a(t), commander of the native troops enrolled among the Mothani. 721 furthermore the tribe of the Mozaidenoi set up a statue for their patron (aotevo) aurelius antoninus sabinus as a mark of gratitude. 722 it re- mains unclear whether this patron is to be identiied with aurelius sabinus, a vete- ran of the tribe of the Aschenoi (ug Aogvev) 723 . if this is the case, this would reveal intertribal contacts which extended to the army. at least the reference to a patron of a tribe shows connections between tribes and members of the roman army. however, it is unfortunately not clear whether all these tribes are to be regar- ded as nomadic, since there are no equivalents known from indigenous inscripti- ons. above all, the inscriptions referred to here apparently reveal that indigenous members of the roman army used roman names, at least for their sons. Unfortuna- tely there is not much known about the change of names or double names, but for- tunately there is a stele set up for a Galba, who [is] also called Golanes [= Gauln], son of abdalgos. 724 besides inscriptions from military contexts, there are also some roman names to be found in villages. 725 problematic in this context is an in- scription mentioning people with roman names, probably from the clan of the Amtare (tev Atog). 726 in this case it cannot be said either whether there is a nomadic background. With respect to the inscriptions mentioned here, a military context cannot be excluded, but that is not certain. The same can be said about the very few roman names to be found in safaitic inscriptions. 727 one inscription, for example, mentions a certain harp b. claudius b. Kaammih (rb bn qlds bn kmh). 728 at least the bearing of roman names seems to show some fashion, maybe connected with loyalty to rome. against the background of what has been said in the third section it is also a matter of debate to what extent arab contingents of the roman and parthian ar- mies, as referred to frequently by Greek and roman authors, were recruited from 719 PUAES iii a 244. 720 PUAES iii a 704. inscriptions from namra: PUAES iii a 7556. 721 PUAES iii a 223: Iou00o aoiaooitou yrvtiiev rv Mo0ovoi ovororvev. 722 PUAES iii a 664. on the inscription see millar (1993), p. 429. 723 PUAES iii a 760. 724 PUAES iii a 56. on the problem of double names with respect to seleucid babylonia and pa- lestine see scharrer (2006), p. 3524, with further references. 725 e.g. PUAES iii a 765 11 ; 787. 726 PUAES iii a 758. 727 on these see e.g. King (1990), p. 58. 728 Wh 837. 320 Ulf scharrer nomads. 729 among arab auxiliaries we ind troops supplied by the emesene ruler iamblichus to caesar in the alexandrian war, 730 and an arab, probably a nabataean troop in the roman civil war. 731 probably at least some of these troops were recrui- ted from the nomadic subjects of these regional powers, similarily to the arab ca- valry of hatra and the auxiliaries of Tigranes, which at least partly were so. 732 fi- nally, Josephus reports that after the death of herod the Great Varus, in order to relief sabinus, marched to ptolemais with auxiliary troops furnished by kings (o- oiriev) and dynasts (ouvootev). 733 Unfortunately it cannot be said who these kings and dynasts exactly were. probably there were some nomadic troops among these auxiliaries, but this is not certain. apparently the problem of identifying arab warriors and distinguishing them from others sometimes existed already in antiquity. Thus herodian, describing the parthian troops of artabanus in ad 2178, presents them as ighting with long lances from the backs of their camels. 734 it cannot be said to what extent his refe- rences to heavy armed camel and horse riders in the parthian army and his general statement on eastern barbarians riding on horse and camel refer at all to arabian troops. 735 furthermore, cicero reports that parthians who were recorded to have invaded syria were indeed arabs being equipped like parthians. 736 This makes it quite dificult to draw conclusions from armament on ethnic origins. only seldom do we ind unambiguous references on nomads serving in the roman and parthian armies, although military service has been regarded in scholar- ship as a supplementary economic strategy of nomadic groups. 737 one reference is found in the safaitic inscriptions. a grafito states that a certain arj was in com- mand (yrb) during a siege, and the grafito is accompanied by a drawing of a woo- den covering, which is protecting bowmen. 738 Thus, although nomadic groups themselves generally are not considered as effective in the storming of cities, 739
here we have even a commander during such a siege, very probably with nomadic roots. however, unfortunately the context of the siege is not clear, and it cannot even be said in what army arj fought, be it (likely) a roman, a parthian or ano- ther army. Unclear is an inscription referring to a horseman in the unit of the l 729 e.g. parthians and arabs move in direction of antiochia: cic. Fam. 15.4.7. arabs in the army of pompey at the battle at pharsalus: luc. 7.514, with rets (2003), p. 3967. arab auxiliaries in the parthian army: Tac. Ann. 6.44. arabs in the army of Titus: Joseph. BJ 5.290; Tac. Hist. 5.1. see rets (2003), p. 395. 730 Joseph. Ant. 14.129. 731 Joseph. Ant. 11.277. 732 Tigranes: cass. dio 36.37.7a. hatra: Tac. Ann. 12.15.1; cass. dio 76.11.2. 733 Joseph. BJ 2.67. 734 hdn. 4.14.3. 735 hdn. 4.15.1; 4.15.3. 736 cic. Fam. 3.8.10. see isaac (1992), p. 237. 737 paul (2003), p. 38; p. 556. 738 Wh 2502a. 739 e.g. proc. bell. 2.19.12, with Graf (1989a), p. 389. on dromedarii being not useful in battles see dabrowa (1991), p. 3656. see generally on tribal warfare schmitt (2005). 321 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east Amrat. 740 This is probably a reference to a tribe serving as some sort of auxiliaries or police for rome. That there were some sort of patrols is revealed by a further safaitic inscription referring to a patrol of nm. 741 Unfortunately it is not clear, whether this patrol surveyed some territory on behalf of rome or of the nabataean kingdom. furthermore it cannot be stated whether its members were dromedarii or not. These reference do not allow the conclusion that the mentionings of troops (j) in safaitic inscriptions 742 imply nomadic groups at roman, nabataean or persian service, since according to one grafito a troop followed an enemy in order to recu- perate camels, 743 thus referring to tribal conlict. in the context of a discussion of nomadic allies of fundamental importance are a couple of Greek inscriptions found in the hauran area which mention strategoi and maybe an ethnarchos of nomads. i have already hinted at the problem of the interpretation of an inscription of a certain odaenathus of the Aw being phylarch and strategos. 744 interpretations of these designations vary to a large extent. accor- ding to the irst interpretation the titles refer to ofices being held by nomads them- selves and being positions within a certain group. 745 according to the second inter- pretation these titles held by nomads imply the nomads acknowledgement by the roman authorities. 746 slightly different from the latter is the third interpretation, according to which the titles were given to some nomad chiefs by rome. 747 finally, a pure local context of the inscriptions has been stressed. 748 it is therefore appropri- ate to discuss these texts in some more detail. The irst inscription to be dealt with here comes from arb, a village in the hauran, which records the erection of a statue for an unknown legatus Augusti pro- praetor and antistrategos by those of an ethnos of nomads because of [his] up- rightness (oi oao r0vou voooev oyvrio oiv). 749 according to sartre the no- mads were soldiers recruited among nomadic people. 750 macdonald argues that the nomadic groups of the hauran never called themselves nomads, and that this de- signation appears to be a rather vague identiication of the donors of the monument. referring to possible meanings of the word r0vo other than ethnographic, he assu- mes that in this context the term is meant to designate a military unit, as he suggests with respect to ethnos of the Thamd of the rawwfa inscription. 751 Whereas this hypothesis appears to be quite convincing, other contexts than military ones are still possible. at least this inscription reveals the honouring of a high roman of- 740 Quoted by macdonald (2005), p. 120. 741 Quoted by macdonald (2005), p. 124. 742 e.g. Wh 23. 743 PUAES iV c 146. 744 see n. 703. 745 bowersock (1983), p. 131; Kuhnen (1991), p. 330. 746 isaac (1992), p. 238; sartre (1991), p. 333 (= sartre (1997), p. 316), followed by hartmann (2001), p. 83 n. 76; shahd (1984b), p. 31. 747 chapot (1907), p. 2930; dussaud (1902), p. 413. 748 millar (1993), p. 430. 749 IGRR iii 1254 (= PAAES iii 378; sartre (1982a), p. 124 nr. 4; moors (1992), p. 317). 750 sartre (1982a), p. 124. 751 macdonald (1995), p. 989. see above, n. 194. 322 Ulf scharrer icial by nomadic groups and his dealing with them which was regarded as being fair. from a clearly military context stems a broken inscription from the djebel el- druz. it was set up in the reign of agrippa ii by a certain charetos, eparch of the Cohors Augusta and strategos of nomads (rao[o ] oarig au [youotg xoi ototgy]o voooev). 752 if the reading of the inscription is correct, charetos had two functions, one being the oficer of a cohors, the other being strategos of no- mads. according to sartre, charetos was the military leader of nomadic troops in the service of agrippa ii. 753 While this may be possible, the ofice of the strategos nomadon is debated. a strategos with respect to nomads is furthermore mentioned in two other inscriptions. The irst one is a fragmentary text mentioning a strategos of camps / squadrons of nomads (ototgyo aoroev voooev). 754 The se- cond one, dating from the reign of hadrian, records the erection of a monument for an ethnarch [and] strategos of nomads (r0voou ototgyou voooev). 755 The ofice of a strategos of nomads has been interpreted in different ways. it has been regarded as an ofice in charge of the command of nomadic units 756 or with the function of controlling transhuman movements and defence against noma- dic incursions. 757 furthermore it has been debated whether the holders of this ofice were nomad chiefs themselves or rather other people. 758 indeed, the ofice of a strategos is a complex problem, as many strategoi are found in different contexts, which are themselves often discussed. Thus at palmyra the scope of the ofice has been regarded as mainly a military function in- and outside the citys territory. 759
on the other side the palmyrene strategos is said to have been the supreme magi- strate of the city and not necessarily a military commander. 760 furthermore it seems not always to be clear whether palmyrene strategoi were appointed by rome. 761
differing views exist also with respect to the role of the nabataean strategos (strtg): 762 on the one hand the ofice is regarded as a purely military function, mainly associated with the protection of caravans, 763 on the other hand it is said to have been rather a civil and administrative function. 764 finally it has been sugge- 752 OGIS 421 (= IGRR iii 1136; sartre (1982a), p. 123 nr. 1; moors (1992), p. 316 nr. 3a). 753 sartre (1982a), p. 123. 754 PUAES iii a 751 (= sartre (1982a), p. 124 nr. 3; moors (1992), p. 316 nr. 3b). 755 OGIS 616 (= IGRR iii 1247; sartre (1982a), p. 123 nr. 2; moors (1992), p. 315 nr. 1a). 756 sartre (1982a), p. 124; asad and Yon (2001), p. 63, assuming a nomadic desert police; hoy- land (2001), p. 99, with respect to PUAES iii a 751. 757 Graf (1978), p. 16; Villeneuve (1985), p. 117. 758 nomadic chiefs: Grouchevoy (1995), p. 1146; sartre (1982a), p. 124. local people: millar (1993), p. 430. people from outside: macdonald (1993), p. 3756. 759 ingholt (1976), p. 1247; matthews (1984), p. 169; moors (1992), 3269; sommer (2005), p. 173. see e.g. PAT 1063 (= Kaizer (2002), p. 467). 760 dirven (1999), p. 262. 761 dirven (1999), p. 2623. 762 on the problem see Graf (1997c), p. 2759. 763 hammond (1973), p. 109; maraqten (1996), p. 229. 764 briquel-chatonnet (1995b), p. 136. 323 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east sted that the nabataean strategos could also be a tribal chief. 765 in addition there is the problem that some inscriptions also testify to the strategos as a village ofical. 766
of course, the ofice of a strategos could be held by indigenous people, as an in- scription in honour of marcus aurelius and lucius Verus shows. 767 still, the scope of the strategos of nomads is far from unambiguous. The interpretation of the term determines and depends on the reading of the other terms. Thus it is a matter of debate whether the term aorog voooev is to be translated as squadron of nomads or just as nomadic camp. 768 it may be a topic of further research to what extent the term strategos of camps/squadrons of nomads might have been used in analogy to the nabataean chief of camp (rb mrt) as is known from an inscription from ad 44, 769 and to the latin praefectus castrorum. of considerable importance in this context is the implication of the term eth- narch, which has also been interpreted differently. The adherents of the irst view suggest that the title, as well as that of phylarch, was given to tribal chiefs by the roman authorities, or at least that they were acknowledged as such, in order for the chief and his tribe to control other tribes. 770 according to the second, similar, inter- pretation, the strategos of nomads and the ethnarchos were roman titles taken over by nomad chiefs, and ought to be regarded as primer of the late antique phylar- chat. 771 in contrast to this, it has been stated that in the safaitic inscriptions there are no equivalents, that ethnarchs and phylarchs are therefore not necessarily no- madic chiefs, and furthermore that it is not cogent that they were appointed by the roman authorities. 772 in fact, there are other references to ethnarchs. Two Greek inscriptions were set up by an ethnarch. The irst one is by a certain annelos, son of samethos. 773 against the background of his interpretation of the function of the ethnarch, sartre suggests that annelos might have been the chief of a safaitic tribe. 774 The other inscription refers to a certain philippos, whose patrimonial name unfortunately is illegible. 775
sartre suggests that the name of the father might have been semitic. he further- more takes into account, that at least some of the ethnarchs may have been naba- taeans. 776 again the scope of the ofice is not clear. if an ethnos was, as macdonald suggests, at least in some cases a military unit, the ethnarch may have had military 765 moors (1992), p. 3216. 766 e.g. PAAES iii 150. see moors (1992), p. 3906; Villeneuve (1985), p. 82. see also sartre (1991), p. 2412 (= sartre (1997), p. 228). 767 PUAES iii 803. 768 squadron of nomads: macdonald (1995), p. 99100. nomadic camp: sartre (1982a), p. 124. 769 Quoted in Graf (1997c), p. 2789. 770 dussaud (1902), p. 413; moors (1992), p. 3189; sartre (1982a), p. 124; sartre (1990), p. 47 8. sartre (2005), p. 235 and p. 359. 771 Kuhnen (1991), p. 330. 772 madonald (1993), p. 3702. 773 sartre (1982a), p. 125 nr. 6. 774 sartre (1982a), p. 125. 775 PUAES iii a 675 (= sartre (1982a), p. 125 nr. 7). 776 sartre (1982a), p. 1256. 324 Ulf scharrer functions. on the other hand, ethnarchs are also known from very different con- texts, for example as an oficial title of the herodians. 777 Thus an ethnarch may well have been an indigenous chief, though the ofice does not necessarily imply a nomadic origin. however, there are no references to whether he was appointed by the roman authorities or whether he was just acknowledged by them. Unfortunately the term phylarch is not found in the inscriptions referring di- rectly to nomadic groups. Whereas since the fourth century ad the phylarchat ap- parently became institutionalized as an expression of some sort of client relation, 778
there are no clear references with respect to earlier roman rule, and accordingly there are basically two different views on the ofice: on the one hand phylarch has been interpreted as a roman administrative term for tribal leaders with relation to rome. 779 on the other hand it has been argued that before the fourth century ad a phylarch was the head of a tribal group. 780 in this context Grouchevoy stresses that the term phylarch, at least as used by strabo, could design the head of either a no- madic or a sedentary group. 781 it seems indeed that the term phylarch did not have a clearly deined meaning. already cicero used the term as a loan-word calling the emesene ruler iamblichus a phylarchus Arabum, and accordingly strabo designates sampsigeramus and his son iamblichus each as phylarch of the Emesenoi. 782 as stated in the second part of this section, it is not that clear whether the term Emesenoi could also imply inhabi- tants of emesa who did originally not belong to the ethnic group of sampsigeramus and his son. Whether in the context of rival claims to the seleucid throne sampsi- geramus was conirmed as phylarch by the ptolemies 783 is not clear from the evi- dence. in this respect the hatrene lords, apparently translated as phylarchs in Greek texts, are also problematic: first, like with the emesene rulers, it is obvious that they did not rule just one tribe. furthermore, before the installation of kingship at hatra it cannot be stated conclusively whether the lords were installed by the par- thian authorities or at least acknowledged by them, and the same can be said about the edessene lords. besides these rulers of larger and at least partly sedentary groups, strabo mentions phylarchs at the euphrates who attached themselves to the stronger party, at least some of whom were nomadic. 784 Thus a phylarch could ap- parently also rule over smaller ethnic groups. furthermore, it does not seem to have been the case that they were installed, dismissed or acknowledged by the roman or parthian authorities. 777 hammond (1973), p. 37. 778 Grouchevoy (1995), p. 11931; isaac (1992), p. 2409; hoyland (2001), p. 81; isaac (1998f), p. 4145; shahd (1984a), p. 1924, p. 51418 and p. 521; shahd (1989), p. 5012; Whittaker (1994), p. 136. see also generally isaac (1992), p. 2409; peters (1999a), p. xviii-xxv. see also schmitt (2005), p. 431. 779 moors (1992), p. 3189. 780 mayerson (1994c), p. 3434. 781 Grouchevoy (1995), p. 1102. 782 cic. Fam. 15.1.2; strabo 16.2.10. 783 so ball (2000), p. 34. 784 strabo 16.1.278. on phylarchs in strabo see also Grouchevoy (1995), p. 1101. 325 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east Unfortunately there is not much epigraphic evidence for the period covered here. The context of one inscription mentioning a phylarch is not clear, 785 and we are not told whether there are connections with nomadic groups or not. however, i have already discussed the inscription of odaenathus, who was strategos of the Aw and phylarch. 786 While this odaenathus was probably the head of a military contingent, it cannot be drawn from the inscription whether he was installed or ack- nowledged as phylarch, or whether he was rather a tribal leader who was chosen by his fellow tribesmen or who had inherited the position. many details about nomadic alliances with rome and parthia up to the third century remain therefore unclear. There is evidence that nomadic groups fought in the armies and policed the steppe regions, but there is no clear evidence on the issue of whether something like cli- ent tribes existed. changes in the third century ad expecially in the third section, but also in some other contexts throughout this es- say, i have referred to the problem of bedouinization. i have quoted the most promi- nent view, namely that the fall of local powers and especially that of palmyra, which led to a ceasing of control over nomadic groups, has been regarded as the main reason behind a process of bedouinization. 787 besides bedouinization, there are different views on the consequences of the end of client states. firstly, it has been stated that the lack of control, following the defeat of palmyra as the last re- gional power, brought about a shift from nomadic involvement in trade to brigand- age. 788 however, so far there appears to be no reliable evidence for an increase of nomadic brigandage. as stated in the fourth section, also the strenghtening of the frontier fortiications does not necessarily imply more raids than before: they pre- sumably ought to be understood in the context of the rise of the sasanid empire instead. furthermore, isaac argues convincingly that we do not know anything about the effect of the decline of trade on nomadic groups. 789 This remark is the more important since, as was discussed in the fourth section, there is not much evi- dence on nomadic involvement in trade. finally, there is an important, but somehow obscure remark in the Historia Augusta, according to which the later usurper in egypt, firmus, as a native of a city called seleucia had relations with the sara- cens. 790 Unfortunately we do not know exactly which of the many seleucias is being referred to. however, since firmus is known to have been a trader, there might have been some commercial relations. 785 IGRR iii 1095. 786 see n. 703. 787 see n. 206. 788 funke (1996), p. 22830; parker (1986b), p. 641. see also bernbeck (1996), p. 406; hogdon (1989), p. 178. 789 isaac (1992), p. 71. 790 sha Quad. 3.3. on firmus see Teixidor (2005), p. 224. 326 Ulf scharrer secondly, sommer assumes centrifugal energies of nomads set free after the breakdown of the dimorphic centres palmyra and hatra. 791 This may be supported by archaeological evidence, as according to bernbeck there was a decline in rural settlements in the surroundings of hatra, palmyra and dura-europus after the third century ad. 792 it is not clear, however, whether there existed or exists something like centrifugal energy of nomadic groups: as i have argued in the irst section, current scholarship stresses a dependence of nomadic groups on the sedentary world. it is furthermore not necessary that nomadic groups should move elsewhere after their centre was destroyed. finally, as discussed in the second part of this sec- tion, the interpretation at least of palmyra as a dimorphic society is rather proble- matic. Thirdly, it has been argued that the defeat of palmyra eventually led to the esta- blishment of the Tankh rule in the steppe regions between the sasanid and roman empires, that they as substitute for the more sedentary client kingdoms became an important political factor in the region, and that the Tankh thus became important as allies for rome and persia. 793 indeed, as discussed in the second part of this sec- tion, there seems to have been a conlict between the growing powers of the Tankh and palmyra in the second half of the third century ad. 794 in this context the idea of a vacuum after the fall of the client kingdoms has been put forward a vacuum which was eventually illed by the Tankh rulers. 795 i will not discuss the problem of bedouinization here, but try to bring these aspects together. Graf simply states that Zenobias rise and fall disrupted traditio- nal social life of north arabia. 796 so, to broaden this statement beyond palmyra: what are the implications of this disruption which followed the end of edessa, ha- tra and palmyra, but also of other regional powers? in the second part of this sec- tion i have sketched a picture of nomadic afiliations of different degrees to client kingdoms, be it as part of a dimorphic society as at hatra, be it as inhabitants of a kingdoms territory with political relation to the centre as at emesa and edessa, or be it as allies to a regional power as at palmyra. all these socio-political bonds were cut from the middle of the third century ad. at the same time the near east faced the immigration and rise of the Tankh which expanded over the whole steppe region. The exact process cannot be traced in detail, but it seems to have been a mixture of conquest (as described in the irst part of this section) and ethno- genesis (as sketched in the third section). This is well illustrated by abars ac- count of the conlict between Zenobia and the Tankh king Gadhima: as we have seen in the second part of this section, Zenobias father, the amalekite chief amr b. arib, was according to abar the ruler of the Jazirah before he was slain by 791 sommer (2003a), p. 43. 792 bernbeck (1996), p. 403. 793 ball (2000), p. 97; bowersock (1975), p. 521; de Vries (1986), p. 237; sartre (2005), p. 358; shahd (1984b), p. 312. see isaac (1992), p. 71. 794 see also with respect to hatra: Wiesehfer (1982), p. 446. 795 bowersock (1975), p. 521; dussaud (1955), p. 634; hartmann (2001), p. 100 and p. 351; sartre (2005), p. 360; Zwettler (1993), p. 13. 796 Graf (1989b), p. 159. see also shahd (1984a), p. 3901. 327 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east Gadhima. 797 Unfortunately not much is known about this king. however, it seems that he illed the political vacuum in the Jazirah caused by the fall of hatra, and there is no evidence that he gained his power by force. his murder integrated the Jazirah into the realm of Gadhima. i therefore suggest that the socio-political ties which were cut after the fall of the client kingdoms were substituted by the Tankh network of alliances and dependencies. 798 it is this process which might be called bedouinization: the establishment of new socio-political relationships which in contrast to the earlier period were not between nomads and sedentary powers, but between different nomadic groups that turns nomadic groups into an important political factor in the near east. nomadic allies at the beginning of the fourth century ad The last part of this section shall be devoted to the new alliances between the noma- dic groups under the hegemony of the Tankh and the roman and sasanid empires. The beginnings are certainly marked by the rise of the sasanids and their policy towards the new ethnic groups. With respect to ardashrs conquest of the iraq, abar remarks that a large part of the Tankh did not want to stay in his kingdom and become his subjects, and so some groups moved westwards to syria. 799 Thus, at the beginning of sasanid rule at least some Tankh groups were not inclined to become vassals of the sasanid king. it is not clear, however, what sort of relations these groups had with the roman authorities in syria. 800 apparently there was some change in the middle of the third century ad, which is to be found in the rise of Gadhima and the policy of shapur i towards the Tankh and other groups. in the irst part of this section i have sketched how that Gadhima was the irst to establish the supreme rule of his family, soon to be known as the lakhmids, over numerous ethnic subgroups. in this context abar remarks that he did not recognise the regional princes of iraq and that this continued up to the rise of shapur. 801 indeed, abar continues saying that, after Gadhima, his nephew amr b. ad also became ruler in the surroundings of the iraq and the hejaz, 802
and this implies that Gadhima had already ruled over these regions. in the present context abars statement that they, i.e. Gadhima and amr, became rulers be- cause the persian kings employed them for this purpose, relying on them to keep the adjacent arabian kings under control is important. 803 shapur seems to have been the irst sasanid ruler who tried to establish some sort of client relation be- 797 abar, Tarkh (History) i 756. see equini schneider (1993), p. 143; hartmann (2001), p. 335 and p. 347; Tubach (1986), p. 2367. 798 on the network see potts (1990), p. 236. 799 abar, Tarkh (History) i 821. see also above, section 3. 800 according to altheim and stiehl (196469) ii, p. 2512, in this context Gadhima went over to rome, but this is not certain. 801 abar, Tarkh (History) i 768. 802 abar, Tarkh (History) i 769. 803 abar, Tarkh (History) i 769. 328 Ulf scharrer tween the Tankh and his own authority by supporting the rise of one of their lead- ing families. apparently the Tankh by this time seem to have become a conside- rable military force which was not only useful for small scale raids: according to abar, Gadhima even raided standing armies. 804 however, as stated in the second part of this section, the role of the Tankh as a factor in the inal defeat of palmyra remains a matter of debate. it is in any case clear that shapur i deliberately em- ployed nomad groups at the western frontiers of his empire and beyond from a passage in abar, according to which the Yemenite tribe of the rabah sent some of its members to the iraq who, after a correspondence with shapur, were settled at al-rah with the purpose of securing the frontier. 805 as stated in the irst part of this section, at the same time al-rah became the centre of lakhmid rule. around the same time there are some hints of saracens serving in the roman army: so Valerian seens to have assigned saracen auxiliaries to aurelian and pro- bus. 806 in the second part of this section i have sketched the problems concerning the change of sides of saracen groups from Zenobia to aurelian and the relevant background. These seem to be the only important references to saracens ighting on roman sides up to ca ad 300. more often there seem to have been roman cam- paigns against saracen groups, as sketched in the fourth section. Unfortunately the evidence on saracen-roman relations is quite sparse for this period, and it seems that the sasanids were the irst to establish some sort of client relationships: in the Notitia Dignitatum, compiled in the fourth century ad, some saracen units are mentioned as roman auxiliaries. 807 it has sometimes been argued that some layers go back to the pre-byzantine period, 808 but this is not certain. it is furthermore debatable whether all the saracens who are mentioned as au- xiliaries of the roman army did indeed belong to the Tankh confederation. as stated in the second part of this section, the Tankh seem to have supported aure- lian against palmyra. it is striking that the persian authorities do not seem to have tried to restrain the Tankh from doing so, although they had supported Zenobia by sending troops. 809 on the other hand, Zenobias husband had heavily defeated shapur in ca ad 260 on his return from his syrian campaign, 810 and here sasanid politics appears to be rather obscure. We are faced again with the problem of chan- ging sides, which i have described with respect to earlier small groups in the third part of this section, and which will be discussed in more detail below in the context of imraalqays. in the present context not too many conclusions can be drawn from the burial of Gadhimas tutor at Umm al-Jeml, i.e. in the roman sphere. 811 The 804 abar, Tarkh (History) i 750. 805 abar, Tarkh (History) i 7701. 806 sha Aurel. 11.3; sha Prob. 4.1. 807 Not. Dign. [or.] 32.278. on the Notitia Dignitatum see shahd (1989), p. 46074. on saracens in the Notitia see shahd (1984b), p. 2830 and p. 545. on fourth-century papyri see mayer- son (1988), p. 734; mayerson (1994b), p. 3223. 808 rets (2003), p. 511; shahd (1984b), p. 27, p. 30 and p. 51. 809 sha Aurel. 27.4. 810 hartmann (2001), p. 12940. 811 see above, n. 482. 329 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east epitaph just shows that he was present there, but it does not tell us why. maybe he was on some diplomatic mission, but this is pure speculation. at least the inscrip- tion does not enforce the conclusion that Umm al-Jeml was in Gadhimas sphere of inluence, or that Gadhima changed to the roman side. 812 as stated in the second part of this section, the Tankh or at least parts of them went over to aurelian under Gadhimas successor, his nephew amr b. ad. as we have seen, at this time amr b. ad was ruler in the iraq by the employ- ment of the sasanid kings. This is clearly supported by a passage in the famous in- scription from paikuli which was set up by the sasanid king narseh. The inscrip- tion mentions a couple of dynasts and kings who stayed by our advice and counsel. 813 among these is amru King of the lakhmids, 814 who is probably to be identiied with amr b. ad. What is important is that there seems to have been some sort of client relationship, 815 which is indicated by the fact that he placed himself under the advice and counsel of the sasanid king. appararently many groups were placed under his rule: according to abar, his son imraalqays succee- ded him and became the governor over the frontier region of the arabs of rabah, muar and the rest of the tribes of the deserts of iraq, the hejaz and the Jazirah. 816
it is not really clear whether amr b. ad had already ruled over all these groups. in the present context it is interesting that the rabah, who, as i have said, settled at al-rah with the encouragment of shapur i, were placed under lakhmid rule. With respect to amr b. ad, there is no evidence at all that he placed himself un- der roman authority in the course of the war against palmyra, and his support for rome against Zenobia apparently did not bring on any troubles from the sasanid side. With regard to amr b. ads son imraalqays position with respect to rome and persia, quite divergent views are based on different interpretations of the ac- count by abar and of his epitaph from namra. according to abar, imraalqays succeeded his father and became governor over a wide stretch of territory from the iraq to the hejaz, and it is stated clearly that he was still a sasanid vassal under bahrm ii and shapur ii. 817 in this context imraalqays epitaph from namra is quite striking 818 the more so since there are divergent readings of the passages which are relevant in the present context. i have briely discussed his campaigns and his claim to rule over (all) arabs, but there are more considerable problems with regard to his status, his rule and his alliances. 812 so stated by ball (2000), p. 85. 813 NPi 93: middle persian (blocks h5,056,05), line 46: [PWNW pndy W pdy]sy ZY LNE YKOYMWNd. The parthian version is too fragmentary. 814 NPi 92: middle persian (blocks h16.031,04), line 44: m[rw] lhmdyn ML(KA) / parthian (blocks g15,051,06), lines 4142: W mrw lhmyn MLKA W mrw pgrnn [MLKA (?)]. 815 see hartmann (2001), p. 344, hoyland (2001), p. 235. 816 abar, Tarkh (History) i 8334. 817 abar, Tarkh (History) i 8334. 818 on the inscription see above, n. 172, n. 2347, n. 48891 and n. 4934. 330 Ulf scharrer The irst problem to be dealt with here is the interpretation of line 4, which has been read mainly in three different ways: 819 irst it has been suggested, that imraalqays placed them [the tribes he conquered] as cavalry under the service of the romans (wklh lfrs wlrwm). 820 according to the second view the king appoin- ted them [his sons] as deputies to the persians and the romans (wklh lfrs wlrwm). 821 finally, bellamy reads it such that the nobles of the subdued tribes as viceroys became phylarchs of the romans (wklm frsw lrwm). 822 The main pro- blem, therefore, is the appropriate meaning of frs in this context, be it in the plural form cavalry, phylarchs, or be it persia (Fris). 823 according to the adherents of the irst and third interpretations, the inscription shows that by the time of his death imraalqays was a vassal to rome, which is presumably supported by his burial place in roman territory. 824 as client to rome he was thus installed to rule the nomads of the syrian desert, which is said to be implied by his title king of all Arab, given to him by the roman authorities. 825
accordingly he is assumed to have changed his allegiance from persian to roman sides. 826 although he follows the irst reading, bowersock remarks that the inscrip- tion does not say anything about a foedus of imraalqays with rome, and he is therefore rather sceptical about the idea that imraalqays was some sort of a roman client king. 827 he is also sceptical about the kings adoption of christianity, which is stated by abar 828 and is often regarded as a reason for his change of alliance: instead bowersock suggests that in this context there are two kings of the name imraalqays, one in abar and one in the inscription. 829 Whereas this has to remain a matter of debate, it seems quite improbable that imraalqays as king of all Arab ought to be regarded as a roman client king who got this title by rome. first there is no evidence at all that he was regarded as disloyal by the sasanid authorities, and after him his son amr was appointed governor over the arabs by shapur ii. 830 fi- nally, procopius states that in ca ad 530 Justinian considered the Ghassanid king arethas worthy of rule over all saracens allied to byzantium, and the author re- 819 on the discussion see bellamy (1985), p. 413; rets (2003), p. 46970. see also moors (1992), p. 30910. 820 dussaud (1902), p. 418; bowersock (1983), p. 13940. 821 bowersock (1975), p. 522; hartmann (2001), p. 3489 n. 304; sartre (1982a), p. 136. 822 bellamy (1985), p. 425 with the translation on p. 46, followed by isaac (1992), p. 239 n. 118. 823 on the problem see also shahd (1984a), p. 434. 824 bowersock (1983), p. 140; isaac (1992), p. 734; parker (1986b), p. 642; potts (1990), p. 239; shahd (1984a), p. 46, p. 58 and p. 60. 825 dignas and Winter (2001), p. 199; bellamy (1985), p. 45 n. 7; dussaud (1955), p. 139; shahd (1984a), p. 5267. according to shahd (1984a), p. 513, imraalqays ruled the territory of the provincia Arabia. 826 altheim and stiehl (1957), p. 1423; altheim and stiehl (196469) ii, p. 258 and p. 31620; altheim and stiehl (196469) iV, p. 2 and p. 280; hartmann (2001), p. 3479; nagel (1998), p. 2; parker (1986b), p. 642; shahd (1984a), p. 324, p. 457 and p. 374, followed by moors (1992), p. 310; Winter and dignas (2001), p. 199. see also isaac (1992), p. 240. 827 bowersock (1986), p. 114. see also peters (1978), p. 326. 828 abar, Tarkh (History) i 834. 829 bowersock (1986), p. 115. 830 abar, Tarkh (History) i 845. 331 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east marks that this had never happened before in the roman sphere of inluence. 831 if procopius remark is correct, it is a strong argument against the view that imraalqays was installed as client king over all arabs by rome. The view that imraalqays changed his allegiance is regarded as possible also by butcher, who in addition considers that the king died while he was raiding ro- man territories on behalf of the sasanid king. 832 in this case it would have been quite improbable that imraalqays assigned troops to the roman authorities. how- ever, those adhering to the view that the king handed over tribal warriors both to persia and to rome come up with different explanations. according to the irst view, imraalqays could have had treaties with both rome and persia. 833 it has also been suggested that the king ruled over groups in both the sasanid and the roman sphere of inluence. 834 finally, the idea has been put forward that imraalqays was not a client of either empire, but that he was independent instead. 835 in this context the readings and interpretations of line 1 of the namra- inscription appear to be controversial too. There are two main readings of the line. 836 according to the irst one, imraalqays assumed the diadem (sd lty). 837
according to the other, the king says that his title of honour was master of asad and maiy (lqbwhw w sdn wmyn). 838 Whereas the second reading does not pose too many problems, the interpretations which follow the irst reading differ to some extent. The main question is whether imraalqays got the diadem from rome or from persia, since that would express his client relationship to the respective power. 839 however, there is no evidence to support this view. if this reading is cor- rect, it seems that imraalqays assumed the diadem himself, most probably in the consequence of his victorious campaigns. by this he would actually follow the hel- lenistic tradition, according to which royalty, expressed by the diadem, was based on military success and victory. 840 i have already shown that rome does not seem to have given supreme power over saracen allies to a single ruler before Justinian. Thus, if imraalqays had assumed the diadem, it is most likely that he assumed it himself, together with the title king of (all) Arab, both in consequence of his suc- cessfull campaigns. 841 This may be supported by the kings statement in line 5 of 831 proc. bell. 1.17.47. see funke (1996), p. 233. on the Ghassanids see e.g. ball (2000), p. 101 5; balty (1989), p. 189; butcher (2003), p. 701. 832 butcher (2003), p. 65. see hoyland (2001), p. 79. 833 dussaud (1907), p. 378; peters (1999a), p. xii. 834 sartre (2005), p. 362. 835 bowersock (1975), p. 5212; Graf (1978), p. 16; sartre (1982a), p. 1389. 836 on the discussion see bellamy (1985), p. 356; potts (1990), p. 239; rets (2003), p. 46970. 837 dussaud (1902), p. 4145; bowersock (1975), p. 522. see shahd (1984a), p. 367. 838 bellamy (1985), p. 356 with the translation on p. 46, followed by isaac (1992), p. 239 n.118. 839 stated e.g. by dussaud (1902), p. 414. 840 on the hellenistic tradition see austin (1986); austin (1999), p. 1312; mehl (1999), p. 156, p. 32 and p. 367; scharrer (2000), p. 1079, with further references. see also the references in scharrer (1999), p. 96. 841 The view that imraalqays assumed the diadem himself is stated by bowersock (1975), p. 522. The view that he assumed the title king of (all) Arab himself is suggested by Zwettler (1993), p. 145. 332 Ulf scharrer the namra-inscription, which states that no king equalled his achievements. 842
further speculation is possible. so it remains the question to what extent imraalqays, by assuming the diadem, imitated constantine, who added the diadem to the royal ornate in ca ad 3256. 843 if he did, it can be asked whether this was a sign of loy- alty to the christian emperor. also the eastern tradition may be a subject of de- bate. against the background of the lack of further evidence and especially of the problematic reading of the namra-inscription it is obvious that answers to these questions must remain speculative for the moment. The main question in this context is therefore that about the nature of the rela- tions of the Tankh rulers with the roman and especially the sasanid empire. as is stated repeatedly above, it is obvious that there is some evidence that they were installed, and regarded as some sort of client kings, at least by the persian kings. This did not hinder them to ight on the roman sides, as was the case with aurelian against palmyra, or as can be drawn from the namra-inscription to deliver troops to rome or to place tribal leaders under roman rule. however, there is no unambiguous evidence that rome at this time installed Tankh rulers as client kings. furthermore, the idea of a change of alliance by imraalqays has turned out not really convincingly. some critical remarks ought to be made in this context about the position of al-rah. it has most commonly been designated as capital or residence of the lakhmid kings, 844 and this seems to be supported by the fact that according to abar the centre of the lakhmids was indeed al-rah, a view followed by schol- arship. 845 occasionally the concept of dimorphic societies has been applied to al- rah. 846 all these views do imply that the Tankh rulers, the lakhmids, had their seat at al-rah and from there ruled a more or less deined nomadic empire, a phe- nomenon known from other historical periods and regions. 847 as stated repeatedly above, the sources clearly deine al-rah as belonging to the sasanid realm. so how are the movements of the kings, especially of Gadhima and imraalqays, to be explained? following the concept of al-rah as capital or residence, there are two main interpretations: irstly, the kings ruled over other segments or groups of the Tankh confederation, 848 and secondly, the kings changed their allegiance. 849 The notion of capital or residence is problematic in this context as it implies that the rulers mainly stayed at this place. especially the term capital follows a rather mo- dern concept, and it has been reasonably questioned especially with regard to the seleucid empire:
since the seleucid kings were most of the time on journey or cam- paign they stayed at different cities, and the idea of a single capital of their empire 842 bellamy (1985), p. 46 with the remarks on p. 45. 843 christ (1992), p. 747. 844 e.g. contini (1987), p. 55; luther (1997), p. 189; nagel (1998), p. 2. 845 bowersock (1994c), p. 133. see also the irst part of this section. 846 sommer (2005), p. 97. 847 see paul (2003), p. 567. 848 see e.g. ball (2000), p. 98. on different groups of the Tankh see schmitt (2005), p. 429. 849 With respect to Gadhima, see sartre (2005), p. 360. 333 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east appears therefore anachronistic. 850 not only the seleucid kings, but also other ru- lers seem to have been more or less permanently on the move, for example the achaemenids or the arsacids. 851 also the Tankh rulers were frequently on cam- paign, and their movement is the less astonishing if one accepts the idea of the Tankh empire being nomadic. it is therefore not convincing to conclude that a king who left al-rah to the west changed his alliance. in order to describe the nature of the relation between the early Tankh rulers and the great powers, i think it appropriate to introduce the concept of frontier warriors. according to this notion nomadic groups who dwelt between two major powers are employed to defend the frontiers while at the same time enjoying a high degree of autonomy. There is often a balance at the frontiers between alliance and revolt. 852 With respect to the empire of Gadhima and imraalqays it has been ar- gued that it was some sort of an independent buffer between the roman and persian empires. 853 against the background of the notion of frontier warriors this is not quite correct. according to this concept, the speciic nature of the relation between nomads and major powers lies in the dificulty to describe dependence and reliance: on the one hand the nomadic frontier warriors are not really subdued, while on the other they are not really autonomous either. 854 if one applies this to the Tankh ru- lers, the contradiction between their employment by the sasanid kings and their seemingly quite independent actions becomes, if not dissolved completely, at least explicable: the early Tankh rulers were formally allies of the sasanid kings and as such had mainly the task to defend the frontier; at the same time they were indepen- dent enough to be on friendly relations with rome and especially in the case of the struggle against Zenobia to follow their own interests. it seems that the conduct of smaller nomadic groups was similar to this. accor- ding to ammianus marcellinus, saracen dynasts (reguli) offered the crown to the roman emperor and honoured him as lord of the world. 855 apparently these dy- nasts must have been more or less closely connected with the Tankh lords of the region. however, at the same time they followed their own policy, seemingly quite independently from the lakhmid kings. 856 furthermore, as ammianus records, the saracens at dura-europus, who had been allied to Jovian, became enemies of Ju- lian, because they did not receive proper payment and taxes from him. 857 it is ob- vious that all this is the expression of a conduct similar to that of the earlier noma- dic groups which were described by strabo and which i have sketched in the third 850 austin (1999), p. 15860 851 on the movement of the achaemenid kings see briant (1988); briant (2001), p. 1067; schar- rer (1999), p. 1101. on the movements of the arsacids see hauser (2005), p. 1812. see on the movements of the frankish kings e.g. also schneider (1995), p. 52. 852 beck (2003), p. 12930. This concept is not to be confused with the elaborate, but too contri- ved semiotic concept of cross-border commuters (e.g. sommer (2005), p. 107 and p. 4028). 853 With respect to Gadhima: hartmann (2001), p. 347. With respect to imraalqays: bowersock (1975), p. 522. 854 beck (2003), p. 131. 855 amm. marc. 23.3.8. 856 on the reguli see schmitt (2005), p. 42930. 857 amm. marc. 25.6.10. 334 Ulf scharrer part of this section it seems, therefore, that also on the lower level the concept of frontier warriors may be applied, and that the political behaviour of the smaller groups did not change between the beginning and the end of the period covered in this paper. conclUsion The notion of frontier warriors is quite appropriate to summarise the problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east. it seems that the relations with the roman and persian empires of most, if not all, of the nomadic groups covered here can be reasonably described by this concept: it can be applied to the Aw and the aif, who may have changed their alliances according to the political circumstances, as did nomadic groups at the euphrates according to strabo. furthermore, on the higher level the Tankh seem to have enjoyed some degree of autonomy while at the same time being vassals to the sasanid kings. besides the changes sketched in this paper, this seems to be a major constant of nomadic alliances with the great powers. apart from explaining the nature of nomadic alliances, the idea of frontier warriors at the same time points with its vagueness to the problem with regard to clear statements on nomadic groups, and on their economic and socio-political con- duct: many of the groups covered throughout this essay are discernible as having seemingly contradictory relations to the sedentary world, be it some sort of econo- mic exchange or raiding, be it revolting or allying. against the background of the theoretical approaches which i have sketched in the irst section, all these features might fall in the category of speciic nomadic strategies of survival, depending on the state of the physical and socio-political surroundings. While this may be an ex- planation, at the same time nomadic groups cannot really be ixed to a certain con- duct. Whereas these problems may be found also in other historical and geographical contexts of nomadic life, it is clear that with respect to the roman near east there is the additional problem of reading and interpreting the diverse material, and so- metimes it is possible only to speculate which conclusions should be drawn from speciic readings and interpretations of the evidence, as the examples of the Thamd at rawwfa, the Greek inscriptions from the hauran and the epitaph of imraalqays have shown. There certainly is further evidence, not covered in this essay, which may contribute to sharpen or abandon some of the views presented here. besides the attempt to be cautious, there are surely preconceptions in this essay which enter some interpretations of evidence brought forward here. one of these preconceptions is that the notion of client kingdoms, itself a modern concept, which has been viewed not without criticism. 858 against the background of this essay it seems that the idea of client kingdoms is not fully appropriate to describe 858 on the concept see e.g. Kaizer (2003a), p. 291; Kehne (2000), including criticism. see also the introduction to this volume. 335 The problem of nomadic allies in the roman near east many features of the nature of alliances between nomadic groups and the major powers. even in the case of the Tankh, whose rulers apparently were installed by the sasanid kings from shapur i onwards, this concept is shattered by the more appropriate notion of frontier warriors. it thus seems that nomads by their very nature often escape the sources and our structuralizing mind, conceptually splitting into a good range of singularities. alt- hough it refers metaphorically to metaphysical entities, a quotation of Gilles de- leuze seems to me most appropriate to summarize the problems of this essay: de- leuze writes that les singularits-vnements correspondent des sries htro- gnes qui sorganisent en un system ni stable ni instable 859 following deleuze, braidotti states that writing is the process of undoing the illusory stability of ixed identities 860 at least writing this essay has been such a process. 859 deleuze (1969), p. 125. 860 braidotti (1994), p. 15.
(Mnemosyne. Supplementum 233) Jongman, Willem - Kleijwegt, Marc - Pleket, H. W. - After The Past - Essays in Ancient History in Honour of H.W. Pleket (2002, Brill)