Page 25 - Edessa, 'The Blessed City'-01, by J. B. Segal (Oxford, 1970). Chapters 1-3

iz EDESSA UNDER THE KINGS
severity of local conditions and the treachery of allies. Their arguments are not
convincing. The countryside of Harran in May does not present the alarming
appearance described by Plutarch, nor are villages and watering points far
apart. As for the behaviour of Abgar, Roman historians are free with accu-
sations of perfidy against Arab chieftains;1 today we would judge them
guilty of no greater crime than unwillingness to commit their fortunes to a
cause in which they had little interest. Indeed, there is evidence that may
wholly acquit this Abgar of treachery. From a Syriac chronicle, it appears that
there was a break in the continuity of the rule of Edessan kings between
53 B.C., the year of Crassus's defeat, and 52 B.C. It is not impossible that
Abgar, far from being perfidious, as Plutarch would have us believe, re-
mained loyal to his Roman ally and paid for his steadfastness by the loss of
his throne.2
The defeat of Crassus restored Parthian hegemony over all the lands to
the east of the Euphrates. A century passed before Edessa re-appeared in
Roman history. In A.D. 49 the king of Edessa, another Abgar,3 was a member
of a delegation which went to Zeugma to receive Mihrdad (Meherdates),
prince of Parthia and Roman nominee for the throne of his country. The
'dishonest' Abgar detained Mihrdad 'day after day in the town of Edessa'.
We may suppose that he provided him with lavish entertainment, since the
Parthian, notes our annalist, was an 'inexperienced youth who identified the
acme of fortune with dissipation'.4 Abgar finally accompanied Mihrdad on
his expedition to the East, and Romans attached to the Edessan the blame not
only for the delay—winter had already set in—but also for the circuitous route
which was taken. Mihrdad, with his escort, passed through the mountains
of Armenia and through Adiabene. But before he could put his claim to the
test of battle, he was deserted, first by the king of Adiabene, then by the king
of Edessa; defeated and captured, he was mutilated by the Parthian king
Godarz (Gotarzes). It may well be that it was the treachery of this Abgar that
led Plutarch, sixty years later, to ascribe similar behaviour to the earlier
Abgar of the time of Crassus.
Viewed through the eyes of the Romans, the name Abgar of Edessa could,
it must be admitted, be equated too easily with temporizing and duplicity.
In A.D. 114 Trajan arrived at Antioch to open the campaign that was to
1 So for example, Tacitus writes, 'The con- Harran to his death at Sinnaca, by a certain
tingents ... of the Arabs took their departure, Andromachus. The latter was ill-disposed
in accordance with the levity of their race and towards the Romans; he was leader of the pro-
with the fact, proved by experience, that Parthian party at Harran, and he later became
barbarians are more inclined to seek their ruler of the city under the Parthians. Roman
kings from Rome, than to keep them'. historians may have transferred the perfidy of
2 A different reason, it is true, is offered by Andromachus to Abgar.
a Syriac chronicle: 'The Edessans were with- 3 Abgar V, Ukkama (the Black), 4 B.C.-
out a master for one year by reason of strife A.D. 7 and A.D. 13-50. Tacitus calls him 'Acbar,
through desire for the chieftainship". It should king of the Arabs.'
also be observed that Crassus was guided from 4 Tacitus, Annals.

www.knanayology.org