Political and Military Conflicts between Shapur II of Sasanian and the Romans with Emphasis on Geographical and Strategic Components

Subject Areas : Historical Studies

Amin Gheytasi ¹ , Mirza Mohammad Hassani ^{2 *} , Askar Bahrami Kahyesh Nezhad ³

1 - PhD Candidate, Department of History and Archaeology, SR.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2 - Assistant Professor, Department of History, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran.
3 - Associate Professor of Ancient Languages and Literature, Islamic Encyclopedia Foundation, Encyclopaedia of the Islamic World, Tehran, Iran.

Received: 2025-09-02 Accepted : 2025-10-15 Published : 2025-12-07

Keywords: Sassanid Shapur , , (309-379 AD), Roman Empire, political, military conflicts,

Abstract :

The political relations between Sassanid Shapur II and the Romans have faced many ups and downs. Shapur II (AD 309-379) to restore Iran’s political authority against the powerful Roman Empire, started a series of wars and succeeded in achieving the desired goals of the Sassanid Empire. The main question of the article is that what factors in The creation and continuation of Sassanid Shapur II’s military political conflicts with the Romans in the period from 309 to 379 was influential Border and historical rivalries, which as a legacy of the Partian period  were rooted in the issue of domination over the land of America, were one of the main factors in the political and military conflicts with the Romans during the Sassanid era of Shapur II The findings of the article show that factors such as border disputes, which were rooted in the political development of the parties, and the significant increase in the military power of the Sassanids with the alliance with the Khyons It shows that during the era of Shapur II Sassanian ideology and religion played a prominent role in the political and military relations between the Iranians and the Romans it took two forms, which caused the military and political conflicts of both sides to expand. The type of research method in this article was descriptive-analytical and in the way of collecting materials based on library studies.

Introduction

The political and military confrontations between S̲h̲āhpūr II (r. 309–379 CE) and the Roman Empire constituted one of the central dynamics of fourth-century Near Eastern history. Seeking to restore and consolidate Sasanian prestige after earlier losses, S̲h̲āhpūr II pursued an assertive frontier policy aimed at reclaiming territories in Armenia and Mesopotamia, expanding Iranian influence in Syria and Asia Minor, and securing strategic communications and trade routes such as those linked to the Silk Road. These ambitions interacted with deep-seated structural factors: a legacy of Parthian/Arsacid rivalry over buffer regions (notably Armenia), the growing religious polarization after the Christianization of the Roman Empire (post-Constantine), and the Sasanian state’s concurrent program of religious consolidation around Zoroastrian institutions. Together, these geopolitical, ideological, and sectarian forces shaped a prolonged series of campaigns, sieges (notably of Nisibis), and large-scale encounters (culminating in the 363 CE confrontation with Emperor Julian), which eventually produced the 363 peace settlement (the so-called “Peace of Dura”) that reconfigured border control in eastern Mesopotamia. This study asks: which factors most decisively caused and sustained the political-military conflicts between S̲h̲āhpūr II and Rome from 309 to 379 CE? It argues that while territorial ambition and military capacity were essential, ideological and religious dimensions, both as motivating rhetoric and as instruments of internal policy, played a prominent role in escalating and legitimizing prolonged confrontation. The paper thus situates S̲h̲āhpūr II’s wars not only as contests over land and resources, but also as struggles over authority, identity, and the geopolitical status of intermediary polities such as Armenia.

 

Methodology

This research employs a descriptive-analytical method grounded in comprehensive library research and historical content analysis. Primary and secondary Persian and Western historiographical sources, chronicles, numismatic and epigraphic evidence, and modern scholarly treatments, were surveyed and synthesized to trace operational sequences, diplomatic exchanges, and ideological pronouncements across S̲h̲āhpūr II’s reign. The analytic approach foregrounds four families of explanatory variables: (1) geographic-strategic factors (fortified urban centers, riverine lines, and terrain); (2) dynastic and historical rivalry (the legacy of Arsacid contests over Armenia); (3) religious-ideological drivers (Zoroastrian consolidation versus Roman Christianity); and (4) military-technological developments (use of siege engines, cavalry formations, tribal alliances). Temporal scope is confined to 309–379 CE, permitting a focused, diachronic reading that links battlefield outcomes to diplomatic settlements and longer-term political consequences. The paper translates narrative sequences into causal inferences while acknowledging the limits of medieval source bias and the interpretive necessity of comparing Persian and Roman accounts.

 

Discussion

1. Strategic geography and the primacy of frontier strongpoints

Control of key fortified towns, Nisibis, Singara (Sinjar), Amida (Diyarbakır), and the urban complex around Ctesiphon, determined operational options for both sides. These cities functioned as defensive hubs, logistic bases, and gateways for projecting power into adjacent regions. Repeated Sasanian sieges of Nisibis (338, 346, 350 CE) illustrate how robust Roman fortifications forced S̲h̲āhpūr II to innovate (e.g., deploying siege engines, mining, and hydrological tactics) and to plan multi-year campaigns rather than quick raids. The geography of the upper Mesopotamian plains, intersected by the Tigris and Euphrates and dotted with walled cities, meant that territorial gains required either prolonged investment in siegecraft or diplomatic arrangements that transferred control without costly assaults. The Sasanian ability to deny Roman access to riverine approaches (e.g., disrupting navigation and irrigation channels) was an integral part of their operational repertoire.

2. Territorial ambition and dynastic restitution

S̲h̲āhpūr II portrayed his western campaigns as restitution of ancestral domains—an ideological frame with deep resonance in Sasanian statecraft. The desire to reverse the dispossessions codified in earlier treaties (such as the effects of the late third-century settlement) animated repeated offensives into Armenia and Mesopotamia and explains the uncompromising Sasanian negotiating stance in the 350s. Letters exchanged between Sasanian and Roman sovereigns reveal mutual recognition of the geopolitical stakes but also divergent maximalist expectations: for the Sasanian court, imperial honor and legacy justified expansive claims; for Rome, conceding key eastern territories risked strategic humiliation. This pattern made episodic truces fragile and incentivized each side to pursue decisive outcomes on the battlefield.

3. Religious polarization as a multiplier of conflict

The institutionalization of Nicene Christianity within the Roman state (after Constantine) transformed religious affiliation into a component of transregional politics. Rome increasingly positioned itself as protector of Christian communities in borderlands (e.g., Armenian Christians and Syrian churches), while Sasanian elites, royal and clerical, perceived Christian minorities within Iranian territory as potential fifth columns aligned with Roman interests. Under S̲h̲āhpūr II, policies of Zoroastrian consolidation (including the redaction/collection of the Avesta under priestly supervision) and episodic suppression of Christian institutions were not merely internal religious reforms but security measures informed by interstate rivalry. Thus, religion served both as a mobilizing rhetoric and a security rationale that hardened inter-imperial stances and complicated local loyalties in contested zones like Armenia.

4. Military capacity, alliances, and innovation

S̲h̲āhpūr II strengthened the Sasanian military through tribal alliances (notably with Huns and other steppe groups), by integrating diverse cavalry contingents, and by adopting or improving siege technologies (e.g., trebuchets and mining) that increased the regime’s ability to challenge Roman fortresses. Conversely, Roman responses, whether defensive fortification of Nisibis or large, multi-ethnic expeditionary forces (as under Julian), show the interplay of imperial logistics, naval support, and coalition warfare. The 363 CE campaign against Julian reveals both the potential reach of a well-resourced Roman offensive and the effectiveness of Sasanian tactics (scorched-earth, harassment, and decisive pursuit) in turning invasion into disaster for the attacker. Military organization and adaptability thus determined whether territorial claims could be enforced or merely asserted.

5. Diplomacy and the political settlement: the Peace of Dura (363 CE)

The post-Julian negotiations culminating in the treaty concluded at Dura marked the political expression of twenty-five years of contestation. The treaty’s provisions, return of eastern Mesopotamian provinces and fortresses to Sasanian control, Roman non-intervention in Armenia, and financial and prisoner provisions, represent a pragmatic recalibration of power in Iran’s favor. The agreement achieved what decades of warfare had not: a formal redistribution of frontier authority that consolidated Sasanian control over previously contested territories and temporarily stabilized commerce and agriculture in the frontier zone. However, the treaty did not erase underlying rivalries: subsequent Roman emperors (e.g., Valens) intermittently resumed interventions, and local alignments in Armenia and Iberia continued to provoke tension. In short, the settlement was a decisive but not definitive resolution of imperial rivalry.

6. Long-term consequences for regional order

By the end of S̲h̲āhpūr II’s reign, the Sasanians had significantly enhanced their geopolitical position: expanded territorial control, secured buffer regions, and bolstered internal religious-ideological cohesion. For Rome, the era signaled a retraction of eastern hegemony and the emergence of a more fractured strategic landscape. Economically, the stabilization of key trade arteries after the treaty aided recovery in damaged agricultural zones, while militarily, both empires learned lessons about the costs and limits of protracted eastern warfare. The Sasanian experience under S̲h̲āhpūr II thus reshaped imperial strategy and set patterns of frontier interaction that persisted for generations.

 

Conclusion

The political and military confrontations between S̲h̲āhpūr II and Rome (309–379 CE) were the product of an intertwined set of motives and constraints: territorial restitution and strategic geography, strengthened Sasanian military capacity and tactical innovation, and the politicization of religion following Rome’s Christianization. While battlefield dynamics and technical advantages (notably siegecraft and cavalry mobility) determined immediate outcomes, ideological and sectarian considerations amplified conflict by transforming local religious communities into markers of interstate rivalry. The Peace of Dura (363 CE) embodies the paradox of this era: a near-total Sasanian diplomatic and territorial vindication that nevertheless codified an uneasy balance, leaving unresolved the latent contest over Armenia and frontier influence. Ultimately, S̲h̲āhpūr II’s wars consolidated Sasanian power in western Asia, reconfigured eastern Roman policy, and demonstrated that fourth-century Near Eastern statecraft combined force, diplomacy, and religious-ideological competition in shaping imperial boundaries. These findings underscore the necessity of analyzing military history together with religious and diplomatic history to understand late-antique imperial interaction.

 

 

References:

آذرنوش، مسعود (1374). نگاهی دیگربه شاهپوردوم، اردشیردوم، شاهپورسوم پیشنهادی برای بازنویسی بخشی از تاریخ ساسانیان. مجله باستان شناسی وتاریخ. 10(1). 45-37.
آگاثیاس (1400). تواریخ (ترجمه محمود فاضلی¬بیرجندی). تهران: لاهیتا.
ابن بلخی (1385). فارسنامه. تصحیح و تحشیه گای لیترانج و رینولد آلن نیکسون. تهران: اساطیر.
ابن واضح یعقوبی (احمد بن ابی یعقوب)، (1381). اَلبُلدان (ترجمه محمد ابراهیم آیتی). چاپ چهارم. تهران: انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی.
الحواط، احمد؛ ایمان پور، محمدتقی؛ جم، پدرام (1401). نقش نامة سری پروکوپیوس در شکست حملة شاهپور دوم به سوریه در سال 359م. فصلنامه پژوهش های تاریخی. 14(3 پیاپی 55). 74-57.
ادول، پیتر (1401). روم و ایران درجنگ (ترجمه محمد ملکی). تهران: انتشارات دبیر.
بلعمی، ابوعلی محمدبن محمد (1390). تاریخ بلعمی (ترجمه محمدجواد مشکور). تهران: دنیای کتاب.
جلیلیان، شهرام (1397). تاریخ تحولات سیاسی ساسانیان. تهران: سمت.
حافظ نیا، محمدرضا (1381). جغرافیای سیاسی ایران. تهران: سمت.
حسین طلائی، پرویز (1402). ارمنستان در روزگار ساسانیان. چاپ سوم. تهران: امیرکبیر.
حمزه بن حسن اصفهانی (1346). تاریخ پیامبران و شاهان(سنی ملوک الارض و الانبیاء). (ترجمه جعفرشعار). تهران: انتشارات بنیاد فرهنگ ایران.
حیدرزاده، محمد (1401). ریشه ها و دلایل آزار و اذیت مسیحیان سریانی در عصر شاپور دوم ساسانی. تاریخ پژوهی. 21(84). 7-24.
خداوردیان، ک.س. و ک، خ، سارکسیان و ت، خ، هاکوبیان و آ،ک، آبراهامیان (1360). تاریخ ارمنستان. ج1. (ترجمه ا.گرامانیک). تهران: ناشر مترجم.
خسروی، ابوذر؛ شهیدیان، مریم (1398). کاربری نظامی و امنیتی قلعه¬ها در دوره ساسانی. فصلنامه علمی مطالعات تاریخ انتظامی. 6(23). 49-74.
دریایی، تورج (1396). ایران ساسانی. در:[تاریخ و فرهنگ ساسانی]، (ترجمه مهرداد قدرت دیزجی). چاپ پنجم. تهران: ققنوس.
دریایی، تورج (1391).شاپور دوم، در: [ناگفته های امپراتوری ساسانیان]، (ترجمه آهنگ حقانی و محمود فاضلی بیرجندی). تهران: کتاب پارسه.
دریایی، تورج (1400). شاهنشاهی ساسانی (ترجمه مرتضی ثاقب¬فر). چاپ دهم. تهران: ققنوس.
شهبازی، علیرضاشاپور (1398). تاریخ ساسانیان:ترجمه بخش ساسانیان ازکتاب تاریخ طبری و مقایسه آن با تاریخ بلعمی. تهران: مرکزنشردانشگاهی.
شیپمان، کلاوس (1397). مبانی تاریخ ساسانیان (ترجمه کیکاووس جهانداری). تهران: فروزان روز.
طبری، محمدبن جریر (1375). تاریخ طبری یا تاریخ الرسل و الملوک. ج2. (ترجمه ابوالقاسم پاینده). تهران: انتشارات اساطیر.
فرای، ریچارد نلسون (1377). میراث باستانی ایران (ترجمه مسعود رجب نیا). تهران: علمی و فرهنگی.
فریمن، فیلیپ (1402). یولیانوس واپسین امپراتور پاگان روم. ترجمه محمد ملکی. تهران: انتشارات مروارید.
فیشر،گرگ، لوین،آریل و واتلی، کنور (1400). عربستان و اعراب از هرودوت تا دیوکاسیوس (از کتاب اعراب امپراتوری های پیش از اسلام). (ترجمهمهنازبابای) .تهران: انتشارات مروارید.
کریستن‌سن، آرتور (1400). ایران در زمان ساسانیان (ترجمه رشیدیاسمی). چاپ ششم. تهران: انتشارات نگاه.
کریمی، سلطانعلی؛ بوشاسب گوشه، فیض‌الله (1401). نقش و جایگاه تیسفون درمعادلات سیاسی و اقتصادی دورة ساسانی. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی تاریخ. 18(69). 147-121.
کیانی، مهرانگیز؛ ابوالقاسمی، محسن (1388). مکاتبات بین سران ایران و روم در دوره ساسانی و نقش آن در دیپلماسی جهان کهن. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی تاریخ. 4(13). 96-77.
گیبون، ادوارد (1370). انحطاط و سقوط امپراتوری روم. ج 1و2. (ترجمه قرنگیس شادمان). چاپ دوم. تهران: علمی و فرهنگی.
لسترنج، گای (1364). جغرافیای تاریخی سرزمین های خلافت شرقی (ترجمه محمود عرفان). چاپ دوم. تهران: انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی.
مارسلن، آمین (1310). جنگ شاپور ذوالاکتاف با یولیانوس امپراطور روم (ترجمه محمدصادق اتابک). تهران: انتشارات اداره شورای نظام.
محمدکریمی، ابوالفضل و همکاران (1403). منصب هزاربِد و نقش آن در تحولات سیاسی و نظامی-امنیتی عصرساسانی. فصلنامه علمی مطالعات تاریخ انتظامی. 11(41). 100-79.
مسعودی، علی بن حسین (1387). مروج الذهب و معادن الجوهر. ج1و2. (ترجمه ابوالقاسم پاینده). چاپ هشتم. تهران: انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی.
مقتدر، غلامحسین (1389). جنگ های هفتصدسالة ایران و روم. تهران: دنیای کتاب.
مک دونالد، مایکل و همکاران (1400). اعراب و امپراتوری های پیش از اسلام (ترجمه مهناز بابایی). تهران: مروارید.
مشکور، محمدجواد (1366). تاریخ سیاسی ساسانیان. ج1و2. تهران: دنیای کتاب.
نولدکه، تئودور (1358). تاریخ ایرانیان و عرب ها در زمان ساسانیان (ترجمه عباس زریاب¬خوئی). تهران: انجمن آثار ملی.
نیکول، دیوید (1395). ارتش ایران ساسانی (ترجمه محمدآقاجری). تهران: ققنوس.
وینتر، انگلبرت؛ دیگناس، بئاته (1398). روم و ایران دو قدرت جهانی در کشاکش و همزیستی (ترجمه کیکاووس جهانداری). تهران: فروزان روز.
یوحنا، اسقف نیکیو (1400). تاریخ نامه یوحنا، سکوپای نیکیو (ترجمه محمود فاضلی بیرجندی). چاپ دوم. تهران: انتشارات بَرسَم.

Ammianus Marcellinus, The History of Ammianus Marcellinus, tr. C. D. Yonge, London, 1894. Dodgeon, M. H. and Lieu, S. N. C, 1991, The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian Wars AD 266-263 A Documentary
History, Routledge: Londan and New York.
Lee, A. D. 2007, WAR IN LATE ANTIQUITY A Social History, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Libanius (1969). Selected Orations, vol. I, translated by A.F. Norman, Cambridge University press, Londan(reprint 2003).
Zosimos, New History,1-6.
Zonaras, 1865-75. Epitome Historiarum. Ed.L. Dindorf. 4 vols, Leipzig.