Beate Dignas & Engelbert Winter - Kaveh Farrokh

35 Diplomacy and espionage 251
II. However, not even his perseverance and private conversation with the
Persian king motivated the latter to abandon the siege, and the city was
ultimately captured by the Sasanians. 31 The author indicates that at times
such diplomatic initiatives of bishops were criticised and viewed with suspicion.
He states that the bishop was suspected of having given advice to
the Persian king as to which parts of the city wall should be attacked. The
suspicions seemed justified when the enemy’s siege engines targeted weak
and dilapidating walls and it looked as if they had been guided by people
with inside knowledge of the city. 32
The episode reminds the reader that in a different context the privileged
status of envoys and the knowledge gained in this way could also be used
in the preparation for military conflicts. 33 Whereas to some extent this
was inevitable and had to be accepted as within the limits of diplomatic
activities, the great powers sought to keep a check on acts of espionage 34
and defectors. Given the lively trade between the great powers the fear of
espionage often concerned foreign merchants. High fines were stipulated
in order to deter them from engaging in such activities (28). In particular
Ammianus Marcellinus, a man who knew the situation in the East exceptionally
well, provides us with much insight into the strict control of the
border traffic in order to stop Romans who sought refuge on the enemy’s
territory because they might transmit crucial information to the opponent.
The following passage sketches the activities of a Roman who decided to
flee the empire for private motives.
Ammianus Marcellinus xviii.5.1–4
(1) A certain Antoninus, formerly a wealthy merchant, then an accountant of the
dux of Mesopotamia and finally protector, an experienced and intelligent man who
was well known throughout those territories, had got into serious debt through the
greed of certain people; he realised that he would suffer more and more injustice by
standing up against the powerful people because his opponents had more money
and were inclined to bribe those who were investigating the case. In order not
to play right into their hands, he therefore turned to more cunning ways and
admitted to the debt, which by way of a shady deal was passed on to the imperial
treasury. 35 And already at this point he had unbelievable plans; secretly he searched
31 Amm. xx.7.7–9. 32 Amm. xx.7.9.
33 Proc. BP ii.31–44; see Lee 1993a: 109–28.
34 Lee 1993a: 170–82; on potential espionage by Christians in the Sasanian Empire see the reference in
the Chronicle of Arbela II p. 77, ll. 7–9 (tr. Kawerau); on this see Lieu 1986: 491–5 and Wiesehöfer
2001: 202 and 295–6.
35 It looks as if Ammianus is trying to excuse Antoninus’ activities; he portrays him as the victim of
fiscal exploitation; this corresponds to the author’s general critical attitude with regard to the fiscal
policy of the Roman authorities.