Topographical error in Ammianus

[Jona Lendering]

If I recall correctly, there is a topographical error in Ammianus' account of the siege of Amida; he says that something is to the left of something else, while in fact it is on the right, or the other way round. It is remarkable, because he was present during the siege.

Unfortunately, I have given my copy to someone (who?) and cannot find my note again. I think it is also mentioned in the introduction of the Penguin translation. Does anyone know which line I am referring too?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Rings a bell!

[Nathan Ross]

something is to the left of something else, while in fact it is on the right, or the other way round.

Overturning history yet again, eh?

I think you might mean the actual site of the city itself. Ammianus tells us that: "on the south side it is washed by the winding course of the Tigris, which rises nearby; where it faces the blasts of Eurus it looks down on Mesopotamia's plains" (Book XVIII, Chapter 9).

Dodgeon (in The Roman eastern frontier and the Persian Wars p.389) writes: "Ammianus' description of Amida needs to be reordered for it to agree with basic topographical factors. The Tigris washes the eastern (and not the southern) side of the city and the plains of Mesopotamia lay to the south (and not the east)."

Michael Grant goes further: "Ammianus Marcellinus' memory of the topography of Amida is wrong in almost every respect." (Greek and Roman Historians: Information and Misinformation, p.72) hock:

Does that sound like the bit you remembered?

[Jona Lendering]

Does that sound like the bit you remembered?

Thanks pal.

[Eleatic Guest]

There is a nice article on the topography of Amida with regards to watermill batteries in the vicinity:

Wilson, A. I. “Water-mills at Amida: Ammianus Marcellinus 18.8.11”, Classical Quarterly 51.1 (2001): 231-6.: http://users.ox.ac.uk/~corp0057/water-mi...0amida.pdf

[ValentinianVictrix]

Of course Ammianus viewpoint of his world was a bit different to ours as surviving maps appear to show their world upside down to ours. And we have to take into account another factor, it probably was in the best interest of Ammianus not to give a totally accurate description of locales, cities etc as he probably was aware that it was not only Romans who were potentially going to read/hear his his history, all kinds of potential enemies may have gleaned useful information if it were totally accurate.

[Robert Vermaat]

Of course Ammianus viewpoint of his world was a bit different to ours as surviving maps appear to show their world upside down to ours. And we have to take into account another factor, it probably was in the best interest of Ammianus not to give a totally accurate description of locales, cities etc as he probably was aware that it was not only Romans who were potentially going to read/hear his his history, all kinds of potential enemies may have gleaned useful information if it were totally accurate.

@map, Ammianus would have known his wind directions like anyone else. It would not have been his concept of a map that would have made him err, but more likely a bad momory.
@readers, since Amida had fallen to the Persians, it would have made no difference whatsoever - he did not exactly disclose secret information!

[Jona Lendering]

Ammianus would have known his wind directions like anyone else. It would not have been his concept of a map that would have made him err, but more likely a bad memory.

That is what I am thinking too: bad memory. There is an interesting parallel in Herodotus' description of Thermopylae. He also confuses the wind directions.

[ValentinianVictrix]

When Ammianus completed his history, sometime between 390AD-395AD, his audience would have included both Romans and Goth's. The Goth's were stationed all over the East at this stage, having been based there as early as 376AD when Valen's began hiring Goth's for his proposed invasion of Sasanid Persia. Whilst there is strong evidence to suggest that Ammianus memory was at fault, he was afterall writing nearly 40 years after the siege of Amida, he may well have deliberatly made errors not wishing to give too true an account of the cities defences and layout.

[Jona Lendering]

he may well have deliberatly made errors not wishing to give too true an account of the cities defences and layout.

Are there other examples of military writers deliberately making errors?

[Sean Manning]

My instinct is that a general concern for "operational security" is a very modern idea. When the ancient sources talk about security, its usually "post guards and scouts to keep enemy spies away" or "the general makes his plan and tells nobody". The type of information ancient historians record about geography is the kind you could get from any merchant who travelled the area for a few drachmas of wine and sausages.