This book is an impressive achievement dedicated to the famous learned personality of the Justinianic age, Procopius of Caesarea, and his work on the Persian Wars. The readership of the volume encompasses a vast area of scholarship, stretching from Late Antique studies to Byzantine history, philology, and literature; from economic, political, military, and social history to diplomatic and foreign relationship studies. Furthermore, and this is the position of the current reviewer, Greatrex’s work could provide late antique Iranian studies with a remarkable implement of a painstaking commentary, dealing as it does with the most important events of Byzantine-Persian relations in the sixth century, a crucial golden age for the two superpowers of the Mediterranean and Middle East, with their emperors Justinian and Khusro I.

For a start, the useful Tables of Names (XXI-XXXII) leads the reader through the multilinguistic aspect of the work, ranging from Greek and Latin to Syriac, Arabic, Iranian, Armenian, Georgian, and Gothic, and provides a practical, synoptical template to distinguish the variety of names (people, places, titles) recorded in the Greek text.

The Introduction (1-29) presents Procopius’s biographical description of his birthplace in Palestine (Caesarea) and his activities in a learned region where the Greek works of Thucydides were particularly appreciated. Here (in Berytus) he studied law, becoming a legal adviser (assessor) and entering the retinue of Belisarius for many years. Procopius witnessed Belisarius’ victories and defeats while accompanying him, although for the most part he remained in Constantinople working on the first book of the Wars and the Anedocta (Secret History). A paragraph on its composition and structure highlights the entire plan of the Wars: the first two books on the Persian Wars, the third and fourth on the Vandals, and the fifth and sixth on the Ostrogoths, with a seventh added later. Procopius divides his material geographically and with perceptible differences in noting with enthusiasm the battles of Dara and Satala (530) but, on the contrary, taking a critical view of Roman affairs in coping with king Khusro, as an indictment of Justinian’s policies. Procopius also frequently illustrates the decline in virtue of the rulers of both Persia and Rome. From a textual point of view, the Wars is a political and military history following the pattern of classical historiography: the third paragraph (on Style) underlines an Attic Greek that emulates Thucydides, along with other elements of Hellenistic stylistic conventions (e.g., accumulation of phrases). Procopius’s education in rhetoric testifies to his care in reporting speeches and epistolographies, while the employment of digressions gives remarkable information on ethnography (Persian customs, the habits of the Tzani) and geography (sources of the Euphrates and Tigris). A tinge of Christian sensibility is recognizable in noting bishops’ action in saving their cities, unlike the Roman army. In historical analysis, Procopius is vehement in his judgement, although lacking attention in chronological precision. In regard to sources, he alludes elsewhere to Armenian works (having some links with the Epic Histories). Other sources consulted include Priscus of Panium, Eustathius of Epiphaneia, one Syriac source or other Syriac Edessene works, and oral sources from when he was in Belisarius’s network of soldiers and commanders, where he picked up stories related to Peroz, Kavadh, or the Hephtalites. Other sources of information have to be taken into account as well: reports from the war front or events seen by himself (autopsy), such as the battle of Dara and Callinicum, or the Nika riot when he was in Constantinople.

The section on “Rome and Persia in the Sixth Century” (21-28) offers a synthetic prologue to the whole commentary and a very useful presentation of the leitmotifs of the work: the collaboration between the two powers, the influence and the competition of one with the other, and the emerging of a balanced dynamic, from the fourth century onwards, in which neither party could gain a decisive advantage over the other. This points to the development of a diplomatic and cultural agenda between the two empires, with embassies, documents, and the role of churchmen within this situation, together with a twofold movement in both directions of deported peoples, pilgrims (from Persia to Palestine), gold miners (from Rome to Persarmenia), traders, physicians, and especially Roman craftsmen.

The structure of the commentary presents a section on the History and Historiography of any treated event, with a related, annotated bibliography of the scholarship on the selected topic. Commentary on Book I (31-376) begins with a Preface of self-presentation and justification of his work with a reminiscence of Herodotus and Thucydides, namely in Procopius’s intention of recording great deeds and not consigning them to the oblivion. The book starts with a paradigmatic episode for the dialectic between Rome and Persia, belonging to the fifth century, i.e., Arcadius’s nomination of Yazdgerd I on behalf of Theodosius II and the guardianship of a tutor (epitropos) entrusted to the eunuch Antiochus. This situation implied a period of peace that afterwards changed with the death of Yazdgerd and the new king of kings Bahram, who attacked Roman territory with a large army, even if without violence, but later agreed with the Romans not to build any new fortress in territories adjacent to each other’s borders. A long section (i.3.4, 4-35: pp. 51-75) is dedicated to King Peroz and the nomadic people of the Hephthalites from the steppes--Greatrex points to an appropriate bibliography of Iranian studies and to the importance of Bactrian documents--also noting the ethnic definition of the Huns and a few differences between them and the Hephthalites in term of sedentarization. The commentary on the ethnographical observations of Procopius is very useful for understanding nomadic funerary practices (sacrifice of the ruler’s retinue of comrades: 3.7); and mostly for information about the Zoroastrian clergy of the Magi (priests of the Sasanian empire), because of Procopius’s interest in the laws (nomos) and customs (themis) of the Persians, such as their everyday obeisance (proskynēsis) to the rising sun. The same goes for the Persian custom of swearing their oaths on salt and for recording the tale of king Peroz and his pearl earring (4.14-31), a motif pertaining to the magical power assigned to pearls and gems in antiquity and especially in relation to the royal charismatic imagery. The section on the king Kavadh and the Mazdakite doctrines (5.1) records a crucial moment of Sasanian history because of the socio-economic and revolutionary religious movement of Mazdakism, which was welcomed by Peroz and entailed harsh consequences for Sasanian marriage laws and customs for high-ranking women, because it permitted intercourse without social distinction. Another interesting episode in the royal career of Kavadh was his escape from the Fortress of Oblivion (6.1-9), a gruesome place of the Sasanian prison system, thanks to the beauty of his wife, who was desired by the jail officer. Greatrex’s managing of different sources on the story (Arabic, Syriac) and bibliography is very clever; so is his quotation of Kaldellis’s opinion about the ironic aspect of Kavadh’s escape and his instruction to his wife (to sleep with the commander of the prison), which echoes the Mazdakite doctrine of holding women in common. Other passages, such as the prohibition of burying corpses in Iranian Zoroastrian culture (I. II. 35) or the conflict in the Caucasus (12.1-19), reveal the difficulty of relations in the religious milieu, such as the politic of forced Zoroastrian conversion by Kavadh (compelling the Christian to adopt the Persian custom of throwing the dead to birds and dogs instead of burying them in the ground). Events of warfare, such as the battles of Dara (i.13.9-14.55) and Satala (i.13-15), are interesting episodes to note the recording of Persian military titles in Greek garb (pityaxes, baresmanas, mirranes) or epistolographic practices during diplomatic exchanges, together with oral speeches and the reciprocal employment of a Roman and Persian intelligence services and spy-systems (21.II-16). A crucial affair of internal politics, such as the Nika Riot (i.24), also holds an important place in the commentary (pp. 334-349).

Commentary on Book II (pp. 377-663) opens with the renewal of hostilities between Rome and the Persians, with an atmosphere of frustration for the grounds and pretexts of the war. A few triangular dynamics concerning Persia and Roman intervention in Armenia (3.1-31) or Armenian claims of the Arsacid rule in this region, speak to the prominence of the Parthian royal lineage and its cultural influence (3.32-53). These hostilities are often tinged with a gloomy atmosphere through the bad omens of comets (ii.4.1-12) and also practices of divination, such as Khusro’s horse neighing and stamping the ground (5.9), reminiscent of the hippomancy beliefs (e.g., Darius’ horse in Hdt. iii. 84-87, as rightly noted). The personality of Khusro emerges in many sections dealing with negotiations and speech, as is the case with the capture of Antioch (9.1-7) or the negative description of his character, because of his invasion and impious behavior in showing little mercy to the population of this city (although in other passages [5.28; 7.35], Procopius acknowledges the mercy of the king). Anyway, in some passages, Procopius’ judgement seems to be read as an indirect criticism of Justinian echoing similar expressions in the Anecdocta, and probably this is an indirect consequence of the symbolic “brotherhood” of both monarchs according to the mutual conventions of royal family adoption. A series of passages (ii.II) on Khusro’s excursion to the Mediterranean, to Daphne and Apamea, point to a curiosity contradicting the stereotype of the king’s ignorance (and confirms Khusro’s golden age of curiosity in cultural promotion). A digression related to King Abgar of Edessa (12.8-19; 12.20-30) and his alleged correspondence with Christ is a precious treatment of a question dealing with the diffusion of Christianity, Edessa’s legendary divine protection, and Christ’s healing power in curing Abgar (probably a topos of imperial propaganda (pp. 483-493). A remarkable section of the commentary (ii. 22-23; pp. 565-588) is dedicated to the terrifying event of the Justinianic plague and its historical, social (urban and rural), economic, and health consequences for the Mediterranean area as well as Persian territory. This phenomenon started from the Egyptian coast (Pelusium) moving then to Alexandria and Palestine to Constantinople. Procopius describes the effects of popular hysteria (visions of demons) and aetiology, adding medical data on symptoms (fever, buboes, frenzy, coma, hallucination) and death, with interesting notes on other effects devastating the city (miasmas, pollutions, famine). Other important records concerning the Zoroastrian fire temple of Ādurbādagān (ii.24.2), the role of diplomacy, or Khusro’s plans concerning Dara and the Lazica war of 547-548, with a digression on Caucasian geography, are fully treated, and all of these deserve a more suitable review than the cursory mention demanded by editorial needs.

Finally, Appendix 1 (Perso-Arabic Sources on Sasanian History, pp. 665-673) displays a noteworthy critical survey of the Islamic sources in Arabic and Persian languages (including the Middle Persian/Pahlavi literature of the Sasanian period), a kind of documentation that Greatrex extensively utilizes in his commentary. Appendix 2 (The Length of Procopius’ Stade, pp. 675-677), Appendix 3 (Nonnosus and Roman Mission to Southern Arabia and Ethiopia, pp. 679-685), a Bibliography (pp. 687-772) (Primary Sources 687-702; Secondary Sources 702-772), and three indexes (Index Locorum, 773-816; Index of Persons and Titles 819-836; Index of Peoples and Places 837-851) complete the work with a useful tool to search for any entry and topic in the volume.