A wealthy and well-connected businessman uses his money and connections to ascend to the highest political post available. Then, to turn people's minds from domestic issues and in an attempt to remain relevant, he launches the most powerful military machine in the world against Persia. They strike with overwhelming force, with boasts and hubris. They expect their enemy to run out of missiles rapidly, before they can have an impact. But their wily enemy has had time to prepare, and the missiles don't run out. After an initial bout of savage combat, truce negotiations begin. Halfway through, the truce is unexpectedly broken and battle breaks out once more.....
You think I'm talking about Donald Trump ?
Nope.
Marcus Licinius Crassus.
Image by Abdullah Romman from Pixabay
But there are surprising parallels between the two men.
Crassus became fabulously wealthy, and much of his wealth was acquired by real estate speculation. He'd buy a property that had been destroyed by fire at a knockdown price, and then use slave labour to rebuild it. It was amazing how often there would be a "mysterious fire" at a property he coveted.
During the Third Servile War (more popularly known as Spartacus' Revolt), Crassus was the first Roman commander to be consistently successful against the rebelling slaves. His legions, some or most of which he may have paid and equipped from his own coffers, did most of the work crushing the revolt, although Pompey jumped in at the end and claimed more of the credit than was probably due to him.
But after this, his star faded a little. After serving as consul (one of the two joint rulers of Rome elected annually) he joined the First Triumvirate. His co-Triumvirs were Pompey and Julius Caesar. It must have been a bit of a slap in the face for Crassus; Caesar had been his protégé and pupil, but his exploits in Gaul overshadowed Crassus' achievements.
In 56BC, the three Triumvirs assigned themselves the governorships of the three most lucrative and exploitable provinces; Gaul to Caesar, Hispania to Pompey, and Syria to Crassus. The ancient author Josephus wrote that in 54BC, he looted the treasury of the Jewish Second Temple. After all, if you're already the richest man in the world, a little more won't hurt, will it ? I guess it's just the ancient equivalent of a quarter of a billion in election funding from AIPAC 😉
From there, he decided to invade Parthia, the Persian Empire to the East. It was an unprovoked attack. Prior to this Sulla and then Licinius had agreed with the Parthians where the border should lie, although it's fair to say the two empires had been jockeying for influence in Armenia.
At the time, Parthia looked vulnerable. It's rules for royal succession were a bit of a mess, to put it mildly ! So it should have been a clean win for Crassus as he steamrolled across the desert with a large army, seven legions at it's core.
The Romans were met at Carrhae, near the modern town of Harran (now in Turkey) in June of 53BC, by the Parthian general Surena. The Roman heavy infantry outnumbered a Parthian army composed of some armoured cataphract cavalry and a swarm of light horse archers by a factor of three to one.
It should have been an easy win. After the horse archers had used up their quiver or two of arrows each, they'd be out of the battle. Except they didn't run out. Just like the modern Iranians with their 25-year stockpile of drones, Surena had foreseen this and had a caravan of thousands of camels loaded up with spare arrows.
The Romans formed a hollow square and advanced, but the horse archers were forever out of reach, drawing them deeper into the waterless desert. In an effort to drive them off, Crassus sent his son Publius, with all the light troops and eight cohorts of legionaries. The Parthians feigned a retreat, then turned and slaughtered the exposed force (and Publius) once they were too far for help to reach them.
This broke both the Roman army and Crassus' will. The remaining Romans retreated, disorganised, thirsty and demoralised to the town of Carrhae.
The following day a truce was called, with Surena offering terms that were surprisingly reasonable; the Romans could retreat unmolested to Syria, but abandon claim to all lands east of the Euphrates. Unfortunately, halfway through the negotiations, something went wrong. A misunderstanding, or deliberate sabotage, perhaps. Crassus was killed, and the Roman army fled. Most were slaughtered, and up to 10,000 were captured. The prisoners may (or may not) have ended up in China, but that's another story.
The survivors were led back to Syria and defended Antioch heroically against a Parthian siege, and the leader was someone who turns up later in Roman history; Gaius Cassius Longinus. Better known just as Cassius, he's the chap who led the conspiracy that assassinated Julius Caesar. I sometimes think he's been given a bad rap, he was a war hero, not the scheming cowardly plotter so often portrayed by film and TV.
None of us know how the current war in Persia is going to go, but I can definitely see parallels so far.
Is the Empire going to be triumphant against the new Parthia ?
Or will we see a Carrhae-like debacle, an initial illusion of success followed by shocking defeat and withdrawal ?
It could be even worse; what I call an "Adrianople Moment", where there is a sudden shock serious enough to threaten the Empire. A carrier being sunk, or US forces in Iraq cut off, unable to withdraw and destroyed.
Or maybe none of these; perhaps the war will drag on like that between the Byzantines and Sassanid Persia, where both sides are trapped in an endless back-and-forth until they are exhausted and an unexpected outside power sweeps both away.
We live in interesting times !
