Beate Dignas & Engelbert Winter - Kaveh Farrokh

c h a p t e r 9
Exchange of information between West and East
Between neighbours and rivals there were plenty of opportunities to learn
about the political strategies and customs of the other. 1 In this context,
it must be emphasised that a transfer of technology and a curiosity with
regard to the foreign culture can be observed in both directions. Scholarly
literature often refers to a ‘difference in the degree of civilisation’ between
West and East – this is not justified. The title of this chapter has therefore
been chosen deliberately in order to stress an ‘exchange’ rather than a onesided
process. To give but one example: on many occasions the Sasanian
Empire functioned as a mediator of cultural possessions from the Far East
and India, which were eagerly received by the West.
The opportunity for exchange was not limited to the official political and
administrative realms. It can be observed in particular with regard to the
border regions (map 14), namely Mesopotamia and Armenia or border cities
such as Dārā, Amida and Nisibis, where a frequent change of rule took place.
‘Enmity did not isolate the two empires from each other ...A common
language . . . and identical customs prevailed on either side of the frontier,
linking together related populations split asunder by political accidents.’ 2
In particular the geographic conditions in Armenia and Mesopotamia as
well as to the west and south-west of the Euphrates, where the Syrian
Desert formed the actual border between the great powers, prevented any
strict control of this part of the frontier. Vast mountain ranges or wide
plains, which were rather an impediment for close communication, and
also the rivers Tigris and Euphrates formed natural borders, which during
the course of the centuries also marked the political borders between West
and East. However, in spite of many attempts to regulate these, there were
numerous contacts between the populations of the border areas. Moreover,
1 For a general survey of Byzantine–Iranian relations providing the background for this chapter see
Shahbazi 1990: 588–99; on the ‘diffusion of ideas’ through various channels see Matthews 1989b:
29–49.
2 Garsoïan 1983: 569–70.
242