Arab Tribesmen and Desert Frontiers in Late Antique Syria*

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Arab Tribesmen and Desert Frontiers in Late Antique Syria* Chapter 16 Arab Tribesmen and Desert Frontiers in Late Antique Syria* This chapter traces the development of the strategy employed by the Late Roman government to guard the Empire’s long frontier, which ran from Palestine to Mesopotamia along the edge of the Arabian desert, and focuses on the government’s increasing reliance on Arab allies settled within the fron- tier. The guardians of the eastern frontier faced difficulties not encountered in the West precisely because the frontier they had to police and defend was a desert frontier, and one that was annually crossed and re-crossed by transhu- mant nomads.1 Barbarian federates also came to play an extremely prominent role in the West, and it will be shown that the history of Arab groups allied to the Eastern Empire has quite a lot in common with that of Germanic federates in the service of the Western Empire, and that inadequate sources have pre- sented modern historians of the Germanic and of the Arab allies with similar difficulties. Diocletian’s Fortification of the Eastern Frontier2 Diocletian reorganized and strengthened the defences of the eastern prov- inces of the Empire after the crisis of the third century, which had seen Persian invasions, and the astonishing episode of the temporary conquest of much of the Near East by the client state of Palmyra. Diocletian’s reforms were in accord with Roman military traditions. He greatly increased the size of the regular army. He raised many new units3 and stationed them along the edge of the empire. The boundary of the territory under direct imperial control was now marked by a road running along the edge of the desert from the Red Sea to the * This article was previously published in Journal of Late Antiquity (forthcoming). 1 The North African limes have presented comparable difficulties. 2 A.S. Lewin, Populi, Terre, Frontiere dell’ Impero Romano: Il Vicino Oriente nella Tarde Antichita, Catania, 2008, 9–46. 3 See A.H.M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire, Oxford, 1964, 55–60. But calculation of the actual size of Diocletian’s army is complicated by the fact that units were now much smaller than under the Early Empire, see below, n. 11. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���5 | doi ��.��63/9789004�895�9_0�7 Arab Tribesmen And Desert Frontiers In Late Antique Syria 289 Euphrates, a road that was used by traders, but was surely designed to help military operations. Much of the road had been constructed in the second cen- tury under the emperor Trajan, but the northernmost section was only com- pleted in the reign of Diocletian, and bore his name, the strata diocletiana. Forts garrisoned by either a cohors of infantry, or an ala of cavalry, were posi- tioned along the road. These forts were located not at regular intervals, but at points where the migration routes of transhumant nomads crossed the fron- tier, and at oases and watering points within the frontier. In this arid region, intruders, whether serious invaders, casual raiders, or peaceful nomads, could only move along routes that had access to water, and it is clear that the defen- sive installations were positioned to guard precisely these routes. Research on the North African limes has focused more closely than that on the eastern fron- tier on how forts were situated in relation to the routes used by raiders and nomads.4 However, it is clear that the eastern Limes was not a continuous bar- rier. It could, for instance, be crossed unobserved.5 Benjamin Isaac was clearly right to describe the fortifications along the eastern limes as a military road system protected by forts.6 The alae and cohortes were the lowest ranking units of the Roman army and their officers received their commissions from the quaestor,7 while units of higher status received them from the primicerius notariorum. Regiments of the higher status, the cavalry units, equites illyricani8 and equites indigenae,9 were stationed at road junctions further in the rear. The troops stationed in the frontier region thus included a very high proportion of cavalry units. They were clearly intended to patrol long stretches of frontier, and to catch up with some highly mobile antagonists. Infantry forces, consisting of two legions in 4 See P. Trousset, “Signification de la frontière, nomades et sédentaires dans la zone du limes d’Afrique,” in W.S. Hanson and L.J.F. Keppie (eds.), Roman Frontier Studies XII, (= BAR (IS) 79, Oxford), 931–42. 5 Procopius, Aed. 3.3.9–14. 6 B. Isaac, The Limits of Empire: The Roman Army in the East, Oxford, 1992, 171. For another view, see S.T., The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan: Final Report of the Limes Arabicus Project 1986–1998, Washington, 2006. 7 As stated in Notitia Dignitatum XXVIII, p. 59.23, and most of the Eastern military lists: Et quae de minore laterculo emittuntur. On this, Jones, Later Roman Empire, 641. 8 It is generally thought that all the units of equites illyriciani were derived from one large cavalry created by the emperor Gallienus, which was broken up, probably by Diocletian, who dispersed these units along the frontier. For the argument see D. Hoffmann, Das spätrömische Bewegungsheer und die Notitia Dignitatum, vol. 1, Düsseldorf, 1969, 247–57. 9 Ariel Lewin, “Kastron Mefaa, the Equites Promoti Indigenae and the Creation of a Late Roman Frontier,” Liber Annuus 51 (2001): 293–304..
Recommended publications
  • 7 the Roman Empire
    Eli J. S. Weaverdyck 7 The Roman Empire I Introduction The Roman Empire was one of the largest and longest lasting of all the empires in the ancient world.1 At its height, it controlled the entire coast of the Mediterranean and vast continental hinterlands, including most of western Europe and Great Brit- ain, the Balkans, all of Asia Minor, the Near East as far as the Euphrates (and be- yond, briefly), and northern Africa as far south as the Sahara. The Mediterranean, known to the Romans as mare nostrum(‘our sea’), formed the core. The Mediterranean basin is characterized by extreme variability across both space and time. Geologically, the area is a large subduction zone between the African and European tectonic plates. This not only produces volcanic and seismic activity, it also means that the most commonly encountered bedrock is uplifted limestone, which is easily eroded by water. Much of the coastline is mountainous with deep river valleys. This rugged topography means that even broadly similar climatic conditions can pro- duce drastically dissimilar microclimates within very short distances. In addition, strong interannual variability in precipitation means that local food shortages were an endemic feature of Mediterranean agriculture. In combination, this temporal and spatial variability meant that risk-buffering mechanisms including diversification, storage, and distribution of goods played an important role in ancient Mediterranean survival strategies. Connectivity has always characterized the Mediterranean.2 While geography encouraged mobility, the empire accelerated that tendency, inducing the transfer of people, goods, and ideas on a scale never seen before.3 This mobility, combined with increased demand and the efforts of the imperial govern- ment to mobilize specific products, led to the rise of broad regional specializations, particularly in staple foods and precious metals.4 The results of this increased con- It has also been the subject of more scholarship than any other empire treated in this volume.
    [Show full text]
  • Ross Burns Justinian's Fortifications East of Antioch
    Ross Burns Justinian’s Fortifications East of Antioch Almost fifty years ago, Dillemann put the issues starkly – fortifications were a useless distraction: The Notitia Dignatatum, at the beginning of the 5th Century, only speaks of units, generally cavalry, with their bases. In [Procopius’] Buildings, the only issues are fortified positions with no mention of units. Defence policy has reached sclerosis. Previously, positions were surrounded by walls of light construction, like enclosures, which attracted Procopius’ disapproval. For good reasons Justinian’s predecessors judged it useless to raise solid ramparts; it was a nonsense to condemn cavalry to defend them. The latter only had to be given shelter from the blows of marauders and pillagers; they did not imagine they had to withstand a siege.1 Is it true, as Dillemann has argued, that Justinian put too much faith in fortresses and not enough in manpower and élan? As a corrective, we have Liebeschuetz’s observation that while fortresses did not in themselves amount to an impermeable physical barrier, they prevented permanent occupation of territory by an enemy. In the sixth century there was no way in which the Persians could be prevented from penetrating into the Empire. The only way to check an invasion was by means of a field army strong enough to defeat or at least to threaten the invading force. Fortified cities provided no kind of barrier and most of them could be captured easily. Nevertheless, they too had an important function. They provided shelter for the inhabitants, their corn and their animals. They also provided bases for Roman armies operating in the neighbourhood…[The Persians] could not remain in permanent occupation while the cities were not in their hands.2 It is well recognised that no line of fortresses can operate as an effective line of defence in its own right.3 Nevertheless, the distribution of forts could mark out the extent of territory a state sought to control for most purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Rimska Fortifikacijska Arhitektura
    Sveučilište J. J. Strossmayera u Osijeku Filozofski fakultet Diplomski studij: Filozofija – povijest Josip Paulić Rimska fortifikacijska arhitektura Diplomski rad Mentorica: doc. dr. sc. Jasna Šimić Osijek, 2012. 1. Sažetak Najvažniji i temeljni element rimske fortifikacijske arhitekture svakako je vojni grad – castrum. Rimljani su bili narod vojnika, kolonizatora i osvjača, pa je rimski građanin u vojnoj obavezi bio veći dio svog života. Iz tih razloga ustroj i izgled vojnog logora pokazuje toliko zajedničkih elemenata s civilnim naseljima. Zidine grada Rima predstavljaju najreprezentativniji primjer gradske fortifikacijske arhitekture u cijelom Carstvu. Murus Servii Tulii (Servijev zid) sagrađen je u ranom 4. st. pr. n. e., a učinkovito je štitio grad do druge polovine 3. st. kad je izgrađen Murus Aurelianus (271.– 275.), zid opsega 19 km koji ipak nije spasio Rim od Alarikove pljačke i razaranja (410.), kao i one kasnije vandalske (455.). U vrijeme Republike rimski castrum (prema Polibiju) ima pravilan pravokutni, gotovo kvadratan oblik; limitiran je i orijentiran na isti način kao i grad te je omeđen jarkom i zidom. Na svakoj strani logora nalaze se jedna vrata. Istočna vrata Porta praetoria i zapadna Porta decumana povezana su decumanom (via praetoria), dok su sjeverna Porta principalis sinistra i južna vrata Porta principalis dextra spojena s via principalis (cardo). Orijentacija glavnih ulica ovisila je o položaju i usmjerenosti logora. Na križanju glavnih osi logora nalazio se praetorium – središte vojne uprave. U vojnom logoru ulica cardo (via principalis) ima veće značenje od decumana. Neki autori smatraju kako osnovne zametke rimskog urbs quadratisa treba tražiti upravo u vojnom logoru. Vojni grad – castrum - slijedi etruščansko iskustvo i kristalizira nekoliko značajnih ideja i praktičnih postavki iz političke i vojne sfere.
    [Show full text]
  • Roman Warfare and Fortification
    Roman Warfare and Fortification Oxford Handbooks Online Roman Warfare and Fortification Gwyn Davies The Oxford Handbook of Engineering and Technology in the Classical World Edited by John Peter Oleson Print Publication Date: Dec 2009 Subject: Classical Studies, Ancient Roman History, Material Culture Studies Online Publication Date: Sep 2012 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734856.013.0028 Abstract and Keywords This article concentrates on the role of technology in improving the operational capabilities of the Roman state. It reviews the organizational and weapon system developments that enabled Roman armies to engage their enemies with confidence in the field, alongside the evolution of fortification schemes that enabled economies of force, which were essential to imperial security. Roman weapons and equipment include the spear, sword, missiles, artillery, shields, helmets, and body armor. Although the Roman army was often on the attack and made use of complex siege technology, it was also highly skilled in the preparation of defensive fortifications. The Romans diligently applied themselves to the arts of war. Their successful mastery of battlefield techniques and their adoption, where appropriate, of equipment and technologies first introduced by their opponents allowed Roman armies to sustain the state over several hundreds of years of challenge and change. Keywords: Roman armies, Roman warfare, Roman fortification, spear, sword, missiles, artillery, shields, helmets, body armor Warfare and the Romans A message relayed to the Roman people by Romulus after his translation to the heavens, stands as an unambiguous endorsement of Roman military prowess. “Tell the Romans that it is the gods' will that my Rome shall be the capital of the world; therefore let them cultivate the arts of war and let them know and teach their children that no human force can resist Roman arms” (Livy 1.16.7).
    [Show full text]
  • Italicized Numbers Refer to the Pages with Related Illustrations. Plates Are Only Referred to in the Text
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-47071-1 — Roman Architecture and Urbanism Fikret Yegül , Diane Favro Index More Information INDEX - Italicized numbers refer to the pages with related illustrations. Plates are only referred to in the text. Achaea, 556 Alexandria, 376, 488, 490, 492, 690, 752 Anthony, Mark (Marcus Antonius), Actium, 557, 572 Kaisereion (Sebasteion), 191 192, 575 Adada, 603, 667 Pharos, 172, 174 Antioch-in-Pisidia agora with monumental steps, 667 tombs colonnaded street, 640 bouleterion, 667 Mustafa Pasha Complex, 490, nymphaeum plaza, 670, 672 temples, 637, 645 490 Sanctuary and temple of (Deified) theater, 667 Shatby Hypogeum A, 490 Augustus, 640 Adamklissi, Romania Alexandria Troas propylon, 640, 670 Trophy of Trajan (Tropaeum bath-gymnasium, 610 Southwest Gate, 670, 672 Traiano), 429, 435 Alinda, Caria Temple of Augustus-Men, 647, 648 aedicular architecture (Asiatic market hall (multi-storied stoa), 667 Antioch-on-the-Orontes, 159, 213, facades), 479, 558, 561, residences, 703 712–713 571, 673, 691, 754 Alonnes (Le Mans) baths, 725, 729 Aezane, Phyrgia baths, 474 Bath C, 725 Bath-Gymnasium, 687 Amman (Philadelphia) Bath E, 726 market, 666 colonnaded street, 715 colonnaded street, 728 Temple of Zeus/Cybele, 634, 640, nympheum, 769 Antiphelos (Kaş), Lycia 641, 705 theater, 721 theater, 681 theater-stadium, 682 Anarchic Period, 812 Antonine Wall, Scotland, 483–484 agrimensores (surveyors), 13, 34, 115, 616 Anazarvus, Cilicia Antoninus Pius, 399, 482, 581, 587, 644 Agrippa, Marcus, 120, 149, 161, 170, 175, amphitheater,
    [Show full text]
  • Hadrian's Wall and Military Infrastructure in Britannia During the Second and Early Third Centuries
    The End of Empire: Hadrian’s Wall and Military Infrastructure in Britannia During the Second and Early Third Centuries. Hadrian’s wall did not exist in isolation. Throughout the second and early third centuries the wall was part of a greater entity both across the Empire and in Britannia. Assessing the wall in Britannia independently of the supporting infrastructure is a key mistake made by many academics. The wall must be assessed as it was: part of a greater system. Nonetheless there is still a major problem that confronts any study of military infrastructure in Britannia: the sparsity of Roman literary material. Texts are a miniscule part of the corpus of material evidence and therefore, a variety of other sources must be utilised. By triangulating corroborating data from the numismatic, archaeological and epigraphic evidence the frontier can be reconstructed. Ultimately it will demonstrate how the military infrastructure in Britannia served not as a defensive barrier, but as a platform that allowed the army to operate effectively on both sides of the frontier. These operations ultimately served as a way for Emperors to gain military legitimacy, either by direct or indirect action, as expressed in various examples of imperial propaganda. Most early reconstructions present the wall as a defensive fortification. Arguably, the most prominent was Eric Birley’s model.1 Many of his reconstructions are, however, based on questionable evidence. For example, he often depicts the wall and other fortifications featuring crenels. 2 The evidence for this coming from niche sources such as the depiction of the wall on the Rudge cup, which features heavily in Birley’s Research.3 This cup depicts the wall with crenels clearly visible.4 However, this may well be an artistic trope used to clearly identify that the object being depicted is a wall rather than as an accurate representation of what the wall looked like.
    [Show full text]
  • XXIII. Limes Congress 2015
    XXIII. Limes Congress 2015 Abstracts of Lectures and Posters List of Participants Abstracts of Lectures Inhalt Fawzi Abudanah, Via Nova Traiana between Petra and Ayn al-Qana in Arabia Petraea .................... 10 Cristina-Georgeta Alexandrescu, Not just stone: Building materials used for the fortifications in the area of Troesmis (Turcoaia, Tulcea County, RO) and its territorium (second to fourth century AD) ... 11 Cristina Georgeta Alexandrescu, Signaling in the army ...................................................................... 11 Ignacio Arce, Severan Castra, Tetrarchic Quadriburgia, Ghassanid Diyarat: Patterns of Transformation of Limes Arabicus Forts during Late Antiquity ............................................................ 12 Martina Back, Brick fabrication ............................................................................................................ 14 Gereon Balle/Markus Scholz. The monumental building beside the fort of the ala II Flavia milliaria in Aquileia/Heidenheim – Public baths or administrative building of the provincial government? (Raetia) .............................................................................................................................................................. 14 Thomas Becker/Ayla Jung, Unusual building structures in the vicus of Inheiden (Germania Superior) .............................................................................................................................................................. 15 Thomas Becker, Der Pfeilerbau im
    [Show full text]
  • Roman Roads, Physical Remains, Organization and Development
    Roman Roads, Physical Remains, Organization and Development Benjamin Isaac ‘Milestones, they are more numerous than needed’, according to Sir Ronald Syme, ‘They may tell very little, often merely certifying stages and intervals on roads already known, traced and trodden: or, less instructive, the names and titles of an emperor. There are happy exceptions.’1 Syme then proceeds to give two examples of such happy exceptions, both from Judaea. The first is a milestone of AD 69, marking the earliest known Roman road in the province, from Caesarea-on-the-Sea to Scythopolis (Beth Shean) and bearing the titles of Vespasian as newly declared Emperor and of the commander of the Legio X Fretensis, Marcus Ulpius Traianus, father of the future Emperor Trajan.2 Then he focuses on discussion of what is now known to have been one of two identical milestones, dated between 72 and 79, both found in the excavations near the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.3 Syme’s interest in these inscriptions focused on the appearance of Traianus in 69 in Judaea on the first milestone, and on the identity of the provincial governor, whose name was erased on both milestones from Jerusalem. It would be of general interest to know the identity of a senatorial official in the seventies, who got in so much trouble that his name was removed from imperial monuments. There is more, however. These milestones are the earliest discovered on the territory of the Province of Judaea. In other words, during the period when Judaea formed a sub- unit of the Province of Syria, administered by equestrian officials, the road-system of Judaea was not marked by inscribed milestones.
    [Show full text]
  • THE STRATEGIC DEFENSE of the ROMAN ORIENT a Thesis
    CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE THE NISIBIS WAR (337-363 CE) THE STRATEGIC DEFENSE OF THE ROMAN ORIENT A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Master of Arts in History By John Scott Harrel, MG (Ret.) December 2012 © 2012 John Scott Harrel ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii The thesis of John Scott Harrel is approved: ____________________________ _____________ Dr. Donal O’Sullivan Date ____________________________ _____________ Dr. Joyce L. Broussard Date ____________________________ _____________ Dr. Frank L. Vatai, Chair Date California State University, Northridge iii Dedication To the men and women of the California Army National Guard and the 40th Infantry Division, who in the twenty-first century, have marched, fought and died in the footsteps of the legions I & II Parthia, Joviani and Herculiani. iv Table of Contents Copy Right ii Signature Page iii Dedication iv List of Maps vi List of Illustrations vii Abstract viii Chapter 1: The Nisibis War (337-363): Thesis, Sources, and Methodology. 1 Chapter 2: Background of The Nisibis War. 15 Chapter 3: The Military Aspects of the Geography Climate and 24 Weather of the Roman Orient. Chapter 4: The Mid-4th Century Roman Army and the Strategic 34 Defense of the East. Chapter 5: The Persian Army and the Strategic Offense. 60 Chapter 6: Active Defense, 337-350. 69 Chapter 7: Stalemate, 251-358 78 Chapter 8: Passive Defense, 358-361 86 Chapter 9: Strategic Offense, 362-363 100 Chapter 10: Conclusion 126 Bibliography 130 v List of Maps 1. King Shapur’s Saracen Wars 324-335 18 2. Nisibis War Theater of Operations 25 3.
    [Show full text]
  • L'esercito, in Seguito Alla Politica Di Espansione Imperialistica
    Annali della facoltà di Scienze della formazione Università degli studi di Catania 10 (2011), pp. 59-76 ISSN 2038-1328 / EISSN 2039-4934 doi: 10.4420/unict-asdf.10.2011.4 OSSERVAZIONI SUI TABULARIA MILITARI di Mela Albana L’esercito, in seguito alla politica di espansione imperialistica intrapresa da Roma, subì una radicale trasformazione strutturale e logistica che lo portò da mi - lizia cittadina ad esercito professionale, supportato da una efficiente burocrazia. L’espletamento delle numerose incombenze, richieste dalla complessa organizza - zione della macchina militare, implicò la presenza di personale sempre più specia - lizzato per soddisfare le esigenze dei vari officia , dove l’ingente quantità di docu - menti prodotti dovevano essere tramessi, raccolti ed archiviati; così, ad esempio, lo stato maggiore di ogni unità potè contare su un considerevole numero di sot - tufficiali addetti a compiti di segretaria, di contabilità, di archivio e di scrittura 1. Numerose testimonianze archeologiche, epigrafiche e papiracee attestano l’esistenza di tabularia per i singoli corpi della burocrazia legionaria e ausiliaria. È opinione diffusa che i tabularia della legione fossero almeno tre (il tabu - larium legionis , il tabularium principis e quello degli stratores )2, ma il loro nu - mero rimane ancora incerto: infatti a Lambaesis, quando venne rinvenuto il ta - bularium principis , si credette che nella legione ve ne fosse solo uno, ben pre - sto però gli scavi portarono alla luce un secondo archivio, il tabularium legio - nis , che si confermò essere l’ufficio più importante della legione 3. 1 M. Philonenko, Le collège des “officiales tabularii legionis” dans le camp de Lambèse , in «RAf», 69 (1928), p.
    [Show full text]
  • ROMAN FRONTIER STUDIES 2009 Proceedings of the XXI International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies (Limes Congress) Held at Newcastle Upon Tyne in August 2009
    Copyrighted Material - No unauthorized reproduction in any medium ROMAN FRONTIER STUDIES 2009 Proceedings of the XXI International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies (Limes Congress) held at Newcastle upon Tyne in August 2009 edited by Nick Hodgson, Paul Bidwell and Judith Schachtmann Archaeopress Roman Archaeology 25 Copyrighted Material - No unauthorized reproduction in any medium Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED www.archaeopress.com ISBN 978 1 78491 590 2 ISBN 978 1 78491 591 9 (e-Pdf) © Archaeopress and the authors 2017 Front cover illustration: The reconstructed south-west gate, South Shields Roman Fort, Great Britain Back cover illustrations: The site of the Roman bridge (Pons Aelius) across the river Tyne at Newcastle; inscription (RIB 1322) found in the Tyne at Newcastle, recording the transfer of legionary detachments between Britain and Germany, c. 158 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. Printed in England by Oxuniprint, Oxford This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com Copyrighted Material - No unauthorized reproduction in any medium Contents Foreword ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ix Introduction �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������xi
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Palmyrene Temples in Long- Distance Trade in the Roman Near East by John Berkeley Grout
    The Role of Palmyrene Temples in Long- Distance Trade in the Roman Near East by John Berkeley Grout A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classics Royal Holloway and Bedford New College, University of London Summer, 2016 Supervisor: Prof. Richard Alston, Department of Classics D M PAUL R. A. D’ALBRET BERKELEY AVUS CARISSIMUS DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP I, John Berkeley Grout, hereby affirm that this thesis and the work presented herein is entirely my own. Where I have consulted the work of others, this is always clearly indicated. Signed, John Berkeley Grout ABSTRACT This thesis is a study of the archaeology, epigraphy and historiography of Palmyrene temples and long- distance trade in early Roman Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and western Iraq. Forty-two temples are examined, both Palmyrene and comparanda, in both urban and rural settings. New models are proposed which characterise the roles which these temples are shown to have played in long-distance trade. These models include: ‘networking’ temples acting as foci for the network of trust upon which long-distance trade relied; ‘hosting’ temples acting as foci of trade itself, hosting fairs and exhibiting wealth from long-distance trade; and ‘supporting’ temples directly supporting trade via infrastructure such as waystations or caravanserais. New insight is thus provided into the role of temple institutions in the broader economy, in urban and rural life, and in the fabric of society as a whole. In the first part, fundamentals are established, terms defined and academic and historical background set, including the historiographical context of the thesis.
    [Show full text]