Thermopylae 267 AD

[Erpingham]

Another chance to help the editors at Wikipedia.  The question has been asked, did the Battle of Thermopylae 267 actually happen?  The problem raised is, how did the battle happen when the attacking force was in ships?  I've done a little digging and it may have been mentioned by George Syncellus, following Dexippus.  But it may not.  Nearly all internet searches turn up mirrors of the wiki entry which is really a one line sub on the battle itself.

So here is the challenge - a difficult period of Roman history, with much uncertainty of interpretation.  Can we turn up a proper academic source which talks of the Battle of Thermopylae 267?

[Dangun]

Thermopylae is not mentioned in Zosimus (approx. 1.20-1.50), one of the main source for the Heruli.

Very tangential...
There is a letter from Decius quoted in the Historia Augusta that mention a Claudius being sent off to garrison Thermopylae in the mid 3rd century.
Unfortunately later scholarship regard the letter as fiction or horribly mis-dated.
So that's probably not helpful at all.

[Duncan Head]

It looks as if there is some new manuscript evidence suggesting that Dexippos did indeed describe a fight at Thermopylae:

Two pages from a palimpsest manuscript in Vienna, recently published by Gunther Martin and Jana Grusková, contain a large extract probably from the Scythica  of the third-century historian Dexippus ("Dexippus Vindobonensis (?): Ein neues Handschriftenfragment zum sog. Heruleneinfall der Jahre 267/268," Wiener Studien 127 [2014] 101-120; the article is also available on Dr. Martin's site on Academia.edu). The extract describes the unsuccessful siege of Thessalonica by "Scyths" and gives a vivid account of an attempt to hold the pass of Thermopylae, in which Greek forces were led by a Roman governor, Marianus; one of the Greeks present at Thermopylae, "Philostratus the Athenian," is almost certainly the historian Philostratus (FGrHist  99), who is perhaps related to the author of the Lives of the Sophists

But this doesn't explain where the barbarian ships went. However there is a hint in the article that this battle may just possibly not belong to 267/8 - "If so, an earlier date for the attack mentioned in the new fragment becomes possible" - so could it conceivably be related to an earlier landborne incursion (as Gibbon, accepting the genuineness of the Decius letter, thought)?

[Erpingham]

Excellent find Duncan - thanks.  The only other useful item I could turn up through Google was Fergus Millar :Rome, the Greek World, and the East: Government, society, and culture in the Roman Empire, p292 where he says Syncellus refers to the Greeks taking position at Thermopylae, in relation to the siege of Thessolanika at the time of Gallienus, apparently taken from Dexippus. 

[Duncan Head]

... he says Syncellus refers to the Greeks taking position at Thermopylae, in relation to the siege of Thessolanika at the time of Gallienus, apparently taken from Dexippus.

There's a translation of the relevant bit of Syncellus at http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Post/1049606. It looks to me as if he is dating the Thermopylae defence to the joint reign of Valerian and Gallienus, that is 253-260, and in the context of an invasion by land - the crossing of the Ister/Danube mentioned.

Anno Mundi 5748
Anno Domini 248
Valerian was 26th emperor of the Romans along with Galienus for 15 years.
[...]
After Gallus and Volusian the son of Decius, according to the greater number of writers Valerian and Galienus his son succeeded to the throne. They were slain when they were betrayed too by their own force, as it has already been said, reigning 15 years, while according to some Aemilianus was at the head for a period of three years with the knowledge of Valerian who was then made Roman emperor.

Under Valerian and Galienus, the Scythians again crossed the Ister River and ravaged Thrace laying siege to Thessalonica the Illyrian city doing nothing of value due to the bravery of the defenders. Consequently, the Greeks anxiously set a watch over Thermopylae, the Athenians rebuilt the wall destroyed in Sulla's time, and the Peloponnesians constructed the Isthmus from sea to sea, while the Scythians returned to their own land with a large amount of plunder.

After this, Shapur, the king of the Persians, overran Syria coming to Antioch and plundering all of Cappadocia. As the Roman army was stricken by famine in Edessa, it consequently rebelled against Valerian, who terrified and making it look like he was going on to a second battle, surrendered himself up to the Persian king Shapur...

And more on the Dexippus fragment:
https://www.academia.edu/7516936/_Dexippus_Vindobonensis_._Ein_neues_Handschriftenfragment_zum_sog._Herulereinfall_der_Jahre_267_268

https://www.academia.edu/8847600/_Scythica_Vindobonensia_by_Dexippus_New_Fragments_on_Decius_Gothic_Wars

[Erpingham]

Interesting.  If the palimpsest's battle at Thermopylae isn't in 267, when is it?  It should be later than the 250 material because we know Dexippus the Boeotarch is only on his third term of office around 250, and he is on his fifth at the time of the battle.  So, is Syncellus getting his sequence of events wrong, is the fifth term a scribal error in the palimpsest or is there another Herul/Goth invasion between 250 and 267?

[Duncan Head]

Interesting.  If the palimpsest's battle at Thermopylae isn't in 267, when is it?  It should be later than the 250 material because we know Dexippus the Boeotarch is only on his third term of office around 250, and he is on his fifth at the time of the battle.  So, is Syncellus getting his sequence of events wrong, is the fifth term a scribal error in the palimpsest or is there another Herul/Goth invasion between 250 and 267?

It all depends on how precise "around 250" is, and it's apparently dated on letter-styles: how narrow a timeframe do these give? Could D have been Boeotarch for the third time about 240, say, which would give more time for a fifth magistracy in the 250s - "cf. Syncellus, p. 466, 1-7 Mosshammer, on a "Scythian" attack on Greece under Valerian and Gallienus"?

[Duncan Head]

You could also see https://www.academia.edu/5079620/INSTITUT_ANTIQUITAS_ISTRO-PONTICA for an interpretation of the Herul-Goth invasions of 267-68 that doesn't mention the defence of Thermopylae at all - perhaps assuming that it took place at a different date?

[Patrick Waterson]

... he says Syncellus refers to the Greeks taking position at Thermopylae, in relation to the siege of Thessolanika at the time of Gallienus, apparently taken from Dexippus.

There's a translation of the relevant bit of Syncellus at http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Post/1049606. It looks to me as if he is dating the Thermopylae defence to the joint reign of Valerian and Gallienus, that is 253-260, and in the context of an invasion by land - the crossing of the Ister/Danube mentioned.

Anno Mundi 5748
Anno Domini 248
Valerian was 26th emperor of the Romans along with Galienus for 15 years.
[...]
After Gallus and Volusian the son of Decius, according to the greater number of writers Valerian and Galienus his son succeeded to the throne. They were slain when they were betrayed too by their own force, as it has already been said, reigning 15 years, while according to some Aemilianus was at the head for a period of three years with the knowledge of Valerian who was then made Roman emperor.

Under Valerian and Galienus, the Scythians again crossed the Ister River and ravaged Thrace laying siege to Thessalonica the Illyrian city doing nothing of value due to the bravery of the defenders. Consequently, the Greeks anxiously set a watch over Thermopylae, the Athenians rebuilt the wall destroyed in Sulla's time, and the Peloponnesians constructed the Isthmus from sea to sea, while the Scythians returned to their own land with a large amount of plunder.

After this, Shapur, the king of the Persians, overran Syria coming to Antioch and plundering all of Cappadocia. As the Roman army was stricken by famine in Edessa, it consequently rebelled against Valerian, who terrified and making it look like he was going on to a second battle, surrendered himself up to the Persian king Shapur...

I think the relevant bit is actually in the next section, from the reign of Gallienus.

"After this, Shapur, the king of the Persians, overran Syria coming to Antioch and plundering all of Cappadocia. As the Roman army was stricken by famine in Edessa, it consequently rebelled against Valerian, who terrified and making it look like he was going on to a second battle, surrendered himself up to the Persian king Shapur agreeing to as well the betrayal of his army, which the Romans perceiving scarcely escaped with a few being slain. In pursuit of them, the Persian king Shapur seized Antioch, Cilician Tarsus, and Cappadocian Caesarea. Then the Persians spread out in their greed with some wanting to seize Pompeiopolis by the sea, some plundering Lycaonia, and a great number being slain as Ballistus the Roman general, who the fleeing had set up over themselves, attacked them with a force by boat...where he killed three thousand Persians. Shapur having suffered heavily in this retreated in haste and fear, while Valerian stayed in Persia until the end of his life. Odenathus, Palmyrian general allied to the Romans killed many Persians as they were retreating over the land of the Euphrates, who was consequently honored as commander of the East by Galienus, killing as well some of the Romans who rose up against him in Phoenicia. Then again, the Scythians locally called the Goths came by the Pontic Sea to Bithynia advancing all over Asia and Lydia seizing the large city of Nicomedia in Bithynia and ravaging the city of Ionia seizing the ones without walls and those partially fortified, though they did not reach Phrygia sacking Troea, Cappadocia, and Galatia. Yet again Odenathus fight bravely against the Persians and captured Ctesiphon by siege and hearing of the calamities in Asia, hastily came until Pontic Heraclea through Cappadocia where he caught up with the Scythians with his forces. Here he was treacherously murdered by one Odenathus of the same name as him, while the Scythians before him had come returned to their own lands by the Pontus. His bodyguards murdered Odenathus, the murderer of Odenathus, and invested his wife Zenobia with control of the East.
   
Then as well the Elurians sailed over the Pontus by the Maeotian Sea and reached Byzantium and Chrysopolis. There they fought a battle and returned a little to the temple at the mouth of the Euxine Sea sailing first down with the next favorable wind the strait putting to the great city of Cyzicus in Bithynia, then the islands plundering Lemnus and Scyrus reaching Attica where they set fire to Athens, Corinth, and Sparta overrunning Argus and all of Achaea until the Athenians attacked them in some narrow places and killed great numbers of them, the emperor Galienus joining them and killed three thousand near Nessus. Then Naulobatus the commander of the Elurians gave himself up to the emperor Galienus and was honored with the honor of consul by him. Auriolus a Celtic Roman emperor then treacherously killed Galienus. So much for the emperors Valerian and Galienus."

Note that here we have raiders moving by sea ('Elurians' is presumably a rendering of 'Heruli'), attacking Athens and other Greek cities and subsequently being caught by the Athenians in 'some narrow places' - within the reign of Gallienus, probably his sole reign (AD 260-268) as he alone joins them to kill 3,000 near Nessus [Edit: adds] and the next thing mentioned is his death at the hands of Aureolus.

If there is a bit of Syncellus which pertains to Thermopylae AD 267, this is it.

[Duncan Head]

Note that here we have raiders moving by sea ('Elurians' is presumably a rendering of 'Heruli')

This is the usual interpretation, though there is a minimalist view that these Elouri are someone else entirely, and the whole tradition of Heruls on the Black Sea is based on a  misreading of this passage (by Jordanes or his sources, among others).

[Erpingham]

If there is a bit of Syncellus which pertains to Thermopylae AD 267, this is it.

Perhaps.  However, there is another piece of Dexippus preserved somewhere (it may be quoted in the Millar book) where Dexippus (the historian, who may or may not be Dexippus the Boeotarch) leads 2,000 militia to ambush the "Scyths" (Goths/Heruls) in wooded and hilly terrain after the sack of Athens.  So Syncellus may be referring to this incident.

[Addendum : It is indeed quoted in Millar's book on pp293-4.  The original reference is Dexippus Scythica, F.28.  I'm afraid I'm not clever enough to link straight to it but put "Dexippus Thermopylae" into Google and it will leap out]

[Erpingham]

Visitors to the battle's wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae_%28267%29 can now see the first fruits of our research effort.  The article needs rewriting, but its a start.

[Patrick Waterson]

This recently discovered fragment of Dexippus extracted from a Vienna palimpsest might also have some bearing on the matter.

[Erpingham]

This recently discovered fragment of Dexippus extracted from a Vienna palimpsest might also have some bearing on the matter.

It is indeed significant - you will see Duncan quoting from it above.  This seems to be the clearest, most detailed info, we have for the battle.  However, as the article says, does this piece of Dexippus actually come from the 267 campaign, or is it from an earlier Gothic incursion?  I.e. The battle definitely happened but do we have the wrong date.

[Duncan Head]

... there is a minimalist view that these Elouri are someone else entirely, and the whole tradition of Heruls on the Black Sea is based on a  misreading of this passage (by Jordanes or his sources, among others).

That would be Alvar Ellegard, Who were the Heruli? (2008).

He suggests,

To summarize. Dexippos' Helouroi may have called themselves Eruli. In that case the later historians' identification of the two was in fact correct. On the other hand, Dexippos' form may be a correct rendering. In that case the identification of the Heluri and the Eruli was as mistaken as Jordanes' (and many others') identification of Gothi and Getae. We shall never know.

Strictly of course this would belong in the wiki article on the Heruls - which doesn't mention Ellegard's article - rather than the one on Thermopylae.