Odaenathus

Traditional scholarship, based on the sepulchral inscription from Odaenathus' tomb, believed the builder to be an ancestor of the king and he was given the designation "Odaenathus I".[note 8][46] The name of King Odaenathus' father is Hairan as attested in many inscriptions.[47] In an inscription dated to 251, the name of the ras ("lord") of Palmyra, Hairan, son of Odaenathus, is written,[48] and he was thought to be the son of Odaenathus I.[46] Prior to the 1980s, the earliest known inscription attesting King Odaenathus was dated to 257, leading traditional scholarship to believe that Hairan, ras of Palmyra, was the father of the king and that Odaenathus I was his grandfather.[note 9][46][50] However, an inscription published in 1985 by the archaeologist Michael Gawlikowski and dated to 252 mentions King Odaenathus as a ras and records the same genealogy found in the sepulchral inscription, confirming the name of King Odaenathus' grandfather as Wahb Allat;[46] thus, he cannot be a son of Hairan son of Odaenathus (I).[21][51] Therefore, it is certain that King Odaenathus was the builder of the tomb, ruling out the existence of "Odaenathus I".[note 10][45][46] The ras Hairan mentioned in the 251 inscription is identical with Odaenathus' elder son and co-ruler, Prince Hairan I.[46][53]

The Roman emperor, Gordian III, died in 244 during a campaign against Persia and this might have been the event which led to the election of a lord for Palmyra to defend it: Odaenathus,[61] whose elevation, according to the historian Udo Hartmann, can be explained by Odaenathus probably being a successful military or caravan commander, and his descent from one of the most influential families in the city.[62] Odaenathus' title as lord was ras in Palmyrene and exarchos in Greek as revealed by bilingual inscriptions from Palmyra.[note 11][65] The ras title enabled the bearer to effectively deal with the Sassanid threat, in that it probably vested in him supreme civil and military authority;[note 12][58] an undated inscription refers to Odaenathus as a ras and records the gift of a throne to him by a Palmyrene citizen named "Ogeilu son of Maqqai Haddudan Hadda", which confirms the supreme character of Odaenathus' title.[61] The office was created for Odaenathus,[58] and was not a usual title in the Roman Empire, and not a part of Palmyrene government traditions.[61][68]

The temple of Bel, belonging to the Palmyrene colony in Dura-Europos; destroyed by the Sassanians in 256.[note 13][69]

Hairan I was apparently elevated to co-lordship by his father, as an inscription from 251 testifies.[64] As early as the 240s, Odaenathus bolstered the Palmyrene army, recruiting desert nomads and increasing the number of the Palmyrene heavy cavalry (clibanarii).[58][70] In 252, the Persian emperor, Shapur I, started a full-scale invasion of the Roman provinces in the east.[71][72] During the second campaign of the invasion, Shapur I conquered Antioch on the Orontes, the traditional capital of Syria,[73] and headed south, where his advance was checked in 253 by a noble from Emesa, Uranius Antoninus.[74] The events of 253 were mentioned in the works of the sixth-century historian John Malalas who also mentioned a leader by the name "Enathus" inflicting a defeat upon the retreating Shapur I near the Euphrates.[74] "Enathus" is probably identical with Odaenathus,[75] and while Malalas' account indicates that Odaenathus defeated the Persians in 253,[76] there is no proof that the Palmyrene leader engaged Shapur I before 260 and Malalas' account seems to be confusing Odaenathus' future actions during 260 with the events of 253.[77]

Shapur I destroyed the Palmyrene trade colonies along the Euphrates, including the colonies at Anah in 253 and at Dura-Europos in 256.[78] The sixth-century historian Peter the Patrician wrote that Odaenathus approached Shapur I to negotiate Palmyrene interests but was rebuffed and the gifts sent to the Persians were thrown into the river.[74][75][79] The date for the attempted negotiations is debated: some scholars, including John F. Drinkwater, set the event in 253; while others, such as Alaric Watson, set it in 256, following the destruction of Dura-Europos.[63][75]

Several inscriptions dating to the end of 257 or early 258 show Odaenathus bearing the Greek title ὁ λαμπρότατος ὑπατικός (ho lamprótatos hupatikós; Latin: clarissimus consularis).[49][76][80] This title was usually bestowed on Roman senators who held the consulship.[80] The title was also mentioned in Odaenathus' undated tomb inscription and Hairan I was mentioned with the same title in the 251 inscription.[81] Scholarly opinions vary on the exact date of Odaenathus' elevation to this position.[61] Gawlikowski and the linguist Jean Starcky maintained that the senatorial rank predates the ras elevation.[81] Hartmann concluded that Odaenathus first became a ras in the 240s, then a senator in 250.[81] Another possibility is that the senatorial rank and lordship occurred simultaneously; Odaenathus was chosen as a ras following Gordian's death, then, after Emperor Philip the Arab concluded a peace treaty with the Persians, the Emperor ratified Odaenathus' lordship and admitted him to the senate to guarantee Palmyra's continued subordination.[61]

The clarissimus consularis title could be a mere honorific or a sign that Odaenathus was appointed as the legatus of Phoenice.[66][82] However, the title (ὁ λαμπρότατος ὑπατικός) was sometimes used in Syria to denote the provincial governor and the archaeologist William Waddington proposed that Odaenathus was indeed the governor of Phoenice.[note 14][49][20] Five of the inscriptions mentioning Odaenathus as consul are dated to 569 SE (258) during which no governor for Phoenice is attested, which might indicate that this was Odaenathus' year of governorship.[83] In Phoenice's capital city Tyre, the lines "To Septimius Odaenathus, the most illustrious. The Septimian colony of Tyre" were found inscribed on a marble base;[83][84] the inscription is not dated and if it was made after 257 then it indicates that Odaenathus was appointed as the governor of the province.[83] These speculations cannot be proven, but as a governor Odaenathus would have been the highest authority in the province, above legionary commanders and provincial officials; this would make him commander of the Roman forces in the province.[83] Whatever the case may be, starting from 258 Odaenathus strengthened his position and extended his political influence in the region.[66] By 260, Odaenathus held the rank, credibility and power to pacify the Roman East following the Battle of Edessa.[83]

Odaenathus assembled the Palmyrene army and Syrian peasants, then marched north to meet the Persian emperor, who was returning to Persia.[note 17][78][92] The Palmyrene monarch fell upon the retreating Persian army between Samosata and Zeugma, west of the Euphrates, in late summer 260.[note 18][92][97] He defeated the Persians, expelling Shapur I from the province of Syria.[92] In early 261, Fulvius Macrianus headed to Europe accompanied by Macrianus Minor, leaving Quietus and Balista in Emesa.[92] Odaenathus' whereabouts during this episode are not clear; he could have distributed the army in garrisons along the frontier or might have brought it back to his capital.[79] The Palmyrene monarch seems to have waited until the situation clarified, declaring loyalty to neither Fulvius Macrianus nor Gallienus.[79] In the spring of 261, Fulvius Macrianus arrived in the Balkans but was defeated and killed along with Macrianus Minor; Odaenathus, when it became clear that Gallienus would eventually win, sided with the Emperor and marched on Emesa, where Quietus and Balista were staying. The Emesans killed Quietus as Odaenathus approached the city,[79] while Balista was captured and executed by the King in autumn 261.[84][98]

The elimination of the usurpers left Odaenathus as the most powerful leader in the Roman East.[79] He was granted many titles by the Emperor but those honors are debated among scholars:[99]

• Dux Romanorum (commander of the Romans) was probably given to Odaenathus to recognize his position as the commander in chief of the forces in the east against the Persians; it was inherited by Odaenathus' son and successor Vaballathus.[100]

Drawing of the posthumous dedication to Odaenathus attesting him as Corrector (upper section). Palmyrene letters transcribed into Latin (lower section)

• Corrector totius orientis (righter of the entire East): it is generally accepted by modern scholars that he bore this title.[101] A corrector had overall command of Roman armies and authority over provincial governors in his designated region.[102][103] There are no known attestations of the title during Odaenathus' lifetime.[101] Evidence for the King bearing the title consists of two inscriptions in Palmyrene: one posthumous dedication describing him as MTQNNʿ of the East (derived from the Semitic root TQN, meaning to set in order);[note 19] and the other describing his heir Vaballathus with the same title, albeit using the word PNRTTʿ instead of MTQNNʿ.[102][105]

However, the sort of authority accorded by this position is widely debated.[102] The problem arises from the word MTQNNʿ; its exact meaning is unclear.[105] The word is translated into Latin as corrector, but "restitutor" is another possible translation; the latter title was an honorary one meant to praise the bearer for driving enemies out of Roman territories.[105] However, the inscription of Vaballathus is clearer, as the word PNRTTʿ is not a Palmyrene word but a direct Palmyrene translation of the Greek term Epanorthotes, which is usually an equivalent to a corrector.[105]

According to the historian David Potter, Vaballathus inherited his father's exact titles.[102] Hartmann points out that there have been cases where a Greek word was translated directly to Palmyrene and a Palmyrene equivalent was also used to mean the same thing.[105] The dedication to Odaenathus would be the use of a Palmyrene equivalent, while the inscription of Vaballathus would be the direct translation.[102] It cannot be certain that Odaenathus was a corrector.[105]

• Imperator totius orientis (commander-in-chief of the entire East): only the Augustan History claims that Odaenathus was given this title; the same source also claims that he was made an Augustus, or co-emperor, following his defeat of the Persians.[99] Both claims are dismissed by scholars.[99] Odaenathus seems to have been acclaimed as imperator by his troops, which was a salutation usually reserved for the Roman emperor; this acclamation might explain the erroneous reports of the Augustan History.[106]

Regardless of his titles, Odaenathus controlled the Roman East with the approval of Gallienus, who could do little but formalize Odaenathus' self-achieved status and settle for his formal loyalty.[note 20][108][109] Odaenathus' authority extended from the Pontic coast in the north to Palestine in the south.[110] This area included the Roman provinces of Syria, Phoenice, Palaestina, Arabia, Anatolia's eastern regions and, following the campaign of 262, Osroene and Mesopotamia.[110][111][112]

Perhaps driven by a desire to take revenge for the destruction of Palmyrene trade centers and to discourage Shapur I from initiating future attacks, Odaenathus launched an offensive against the Persians.[113] The suppression of Fulvius Macrianus' rebellion probably prompted Gallienus to entrust the Palmyrene monarch with the war in Persia and Roman soldiers were in the ranks of Odaenathus' army for this campaign.[91] In the spring of 262, the King marched north into the occupied Roman province of Mesopotamia, driving out the Persian garrisons and recapturing Edessa and Carrhae.[114][115] The first onslaught was aimed at Nisibis, which Odaenathus regained but sacked, since the inhabitants had been sympathetic towards the Persian occupation.[115] A little later he destroyed the Jewish city of Nehardea, 45 kilometres (28 mi) west of the Persian capital Ctesiphon,[note 21][118] as he considered the Jews of Mesopotamia to be loyal to Shapur I.[119] By late 262 or early 263, Odaenathus stood outside the walls of the Persian capital.[120]

The exact route taken by Odaenathus from Palmyra to Ctesiphon remains uncertain; it was probably similar to the route Emperor Julian took in 363 during his campaign against Persia.[121] If he did use this route, Odaenathus would have crossed the Euphrates at Zeugma then moved east to Edessa followed by Carrhae then Nisibis. Here, he would have descended south along the Khabur River to the Euphrates valley and then marched along the river's left bank to Nehardea.[121] He then penetrated the Sassanian province of Asōristān and marched along the royal canal Naarmalcha towards the Tigris, where the Persian capital stood.[121]

Once at Ctesiphon, Odaenathus immediately began a siege of the well-fortified winter residence of the Persian kings; severe damage was inflicted upon the surrounding areas during several battles with Persian troops.[120] The city held out and the logistical problems of fighting in enemy territory probably prompted the Palmyrenes to lift the siege.[120] Odaenathus headed north along the Euphrates carrying with him numerous prisoners and much booty.[120] The invasion resulted in the full restoration of the Roman lands which had been occupied by Shapur I since the beginning of his invasions in 252: Osroene and Mesopotamia.[note 22][111][123] However, Dura-Europus and other Palmyrene posts south of Circesium, such as Anah, were not rebuilt.[114] Odaenathus sent the captives to Rome, and by the end of 263 Gallienus assumed the title Persicus maximus ("the great victor in Persia") and held a triumph in Rome.[124]

In 263, after his return, Odaenathus assumed the title of King of Kings of the East (Mlk Mlk dy Mdnh),[note 23] and crowned his son Herodianus (Hairan I) as co-King of Kings.[126][127] A statue was erected and dedicated for Herodianus to celebrate his coronation by Septimius Worod, the duumviri (magistrate) of Palmyra, and Julius Aurelius, the Queen's procurator (treasurer). The dedication, in Greek, is undated,[128] but Septimius Worod was a duumviri between 263 and 264. Hence, the coronation took place c. 263.[note 24][130] Contemporary evidence for Odaenathus bearing the title of King of Kings is lacking; all firmly dated inscriptions attesting Odaenathus with the title were commissioned after his death, including one that is dated to 271.[51][78] However, Herodianus died with his father,[131] and since he is directly attested as "King of Kings" during his father's lifetime, it is unimaginable that Odaenathus was simply a king while his son was the King of Kings.[132][133] An undated inscription, written in Greek and difficult to decipher, found on a stone reused in the Palmyrene Camp of Diocletian, addresses Odaenathus as King of Kings (Rex regum) and was probably set during his reign.[134]

According to the dedication, Herodianus was crowned near the Orontes, which indicates a ceremony taking place in Antioch on the Orontes, the metropolis of Syria.[note 25][128] The title was a symbol of legitimacy in the East, dating back to the Assyrians, then the Achaemenids, who used it to symbolize their supremacy over all other rulers; it was later adopted by the Parthian monarchs to legitimize their conquests.[135] The first Sassanian monarch, Ardashir I, adopted the title following his victory over the Parthians.[136] Odaenathus' son was crowned with a diadem and a tiara; the choice of Antioch on the Orontes was probably meant to demonstrate that the Palmyrene monarchs were now the successors of the Seleucid and Iranian rulers who had controlled Syria and Mesopotamia in the past.[127]

Roman regions under the authority of Odaenathus (yellow) and the Palmyrene kingdom (green)

In analyzing the rise of Odaenathus and his complicated relationship with Rome, the historian Gary K. Young concluded that "to search for any kind of regularity or normality in such a situation is clearly pointless".[137] In practice, Palmyra became an allied kingdom of Rome, but legally, it remained part of the empire. The "King of Kings" title was probably not aimed at the position of the Roman emperor but at Shapur I; Odaenathus was declaring that he, not the Persian monarch, was the legitimate King of Kings of the East.[138] Odaenathus' intentions are questioned by some historians, such as Drinkwater, who attributed the attempted negotiations with Shapur I to Odaenathus' quest for power.[75] However, in contrast to the norm of this period when powerful generals frequently proclaimed themselves emperors, Odaenathus chose not to attempt to usurp Gallienus' throne.[139]

The relationship between Odaenathus and the Emperor should be understood from two different perspectives: Roman and Syrian. In Rome, broad power delegation by the Emperor to an individual from outside the imperial family was not considered a problem;[140] such authority had been granted several times since the days of Augustus in the first century.[141] The Syrian perspective was different:[140] according to Potter, the dedication celebrating Herodianus' coronation on the Orontes should be interpreted to mean a "Palmyrene claim to kingship in Syria" and control over it during the reign of Odaenathus.[142] What the central government thought of such claims is unclear, but it is doubtful that Gallienus recognized the situation as the Palmyrenes understood it.[141] In the Roman Empire's hierarchical system, a vassal king using the title of King of Kings did not indicate that he was a peer of the Emperor or that the ties of vassalage were cut.[143] Such different understandings eventually led to the conflict between Rome and Palmyra during the reign of Zenobia, who considered her husband's Roman offices hereditary and an expression of independent authority.[note 26][144]

The King had effective control over the Roman East where his military authority was absolute.[108][145] Odaenathus respected Gallienus' authority to appoint provincial governors,[145] but dealt swiftly with opposition: the Anonymus post Dionem, usually associated with the sixth-century historian Eustathius of Epiphania or Peter the Patrician,[44] mentions the story of Kyrinus, or Quirinus, a Roman official, who showed dissatisfaction with Odaenathus' authority over the Persian frontier, and was immediately executed by the King.[note 27][146][96][147] In general, Odaenathus' actions were connected to his and Palmyra's interests only. His support of Gallienus and his Roman titles did not hide the Palmyrene base of his power and the local origin of his armies, as with his decision not to wait for the Emperor to help in 260.[82][106] Odaenathus' status seems to have been, as Watson puts it, "something between powerful subject, independent vassal king and rival emperor".[106]

Herodianus wearing the Palmyrene crown

Odaenathus behaved as a sovereign monarch;[148] outside his kingdom of Palmyra, he had overall administrative and military authority over the provincial governors of the Roman eastern provinces.[149] Inside Palmyra, no Roman provincial official had any authority; the King filled the government with Palmyrenes.[150] In parallel to the Iranian practice of making the government a family enterprise, Odaenathus bestowed his own gentilicium (Septimius) upon his leading generals and officials such as Zabdas, Zabbai and Worod.[note 28][150] Most Palmyrene constitutional institutions continued to function normally during Odaenathus' reign;[102] he maintained many civic establishments,[66][152] but the last magistrates were elected in 264,[59] and the Palmyrene council was not attested after that year. After this year, a governor, Septimius Worod, was appointed by the King for the city of Palmyra,[153] who also functioned as a viceroy when Odaenathus was on campaign.[154]

A lead token depicting Herodianus shows him wearing a tiara crown shaped like that of the Parthian monarchs, so it must have been Odaenathus' crown;[155] this combination of imagery, together with the "King of Kings" title, indicates that Odaenathus considered himself the rival of the Sassanians and the protector of the region against them.[156] Many intellectuals relocated to Palmyra and enjoyed the King's patronage;[157] most prominently Cassius Longinus, who probably arrived in the 260s.[158] It is possible that Odaenathus influenced local writers to promote his rule;[159] a prophecy in the thirteenth Sibylline Oracle, written after the events it "prophesied",[160] reads: "Then shall come one who was sent by the sun [i.e., Odaenathus], a mighty and fearful lion, breathing much flame. Then he with much shameless daring will destroy ... the greatest beast – venomous, fearful and emitting a great deal of hisses [i.e., Shapur I]".[161] The authority of Odaenathus did not appease all factions in Syria and the glorification of the King in the oracle could be a politically sponsored propaganda aimed at expanding Odaenathus' support.[note 29][159] Another writer in the Palmyrene court, Nicostratus of Trebizond, probably accompanied the King on his campaigns and wrote a history of the period, starting with Philip the Arab and ending shortly before Odaenathus' death.[162] According to Potter, Nicostratus' account was meant to glorify Odaenathus and demonstrate his superiority over the Roman Emperor.[163]

Antiochene coin of Gallienus c. 264–265, depicting captives on its reverse. It was possibly minted to celebrate Odaenathus' victories in Persia

Antiochene coin of Gallienus 264–265, depicting a radiate lion on its reverse. The animal is probably a reference to Odaenathus who is described as a lion in the Thirteenth Sibylline Oracle

Odaenathus minted coinage only in the name of Gallienus,[164] and produced no coins bearing his own image.[102] The engraver Hubertus Goltzius forged coins of Odaenathus in the sixteenth century;[165] according to the eighteenth-century numismatist Joseph Hilarius Eckhel "The coins of Odenathus are known only to Goltzius; and if anyone will put faith in their existence, let him go to the fountain head (i.e. Goltzius)". According to the Augustan History, Gallienus minted a coin in honour of Odaenathus where he was depicted taking the Persians captive;[166] a coin of Gallienus minted in Antioch and dated to c. 264–265 depicts two seated captives on its reverse and was associated with the victories of Odaenathus by the historian Michael Geiger.[167] Other coins of Gallienus depict lions on their reverses; the animal was portrayed in several fashions: bare headed with a bull's head between its paws; radiate head; radiate head with a bull's head between its paws; or an eagle standing on its back. The historian Erika Manders considered it possible that those coins were issued for Odaenathus, as the depiction of a lion is reminiscent of the thirteenth Sibylline Oracle's description of Odaenathus as a "mighty and fearful lion, breathing much flame".[note 30][169]

The primary sources are silent regarding events following the first Persian campaign, but this is an indication of the peace that prevailed and that the Persians had ceased being a threat to the Roman East.[170] The evidence for the second campaign is meager; Zosimus is the only one to mention it specifically.[171] A passage in the thirteenth Sibylline Oracle is interpreted by Hartmann as an indication of a second offensive.[172] With the rise of the Sassanid dynasty, Palmyrene trade caravans to the East diminished with only three recorded after 224. The last caravan returned to Palmyra in 266, and this was probably facilitated by the campaign, which probably took place in 266.[173] The King marched directly to Ctesiphon, but he had to break off the siege and march north to face an influx of Germanic raiders attacking Anatolia.[171][174]

The Romans used the designation "Scythian" to denote many tribes, regardless of their ethnic origin, and sometimes the term would be interchangeable with Goths. The tribes attacking Anatolia were probably the Heruli who built ships to cross the Black Sea in 267 and ravaged the coasts of Bithynia and Pontus, besieging Heraclea Pontica.[171] According to the eighth-century historian George Syncellus, Odaenathus arrived at Anatolia with Herodianus and headed to Heraclea but the riders were already gone, having loaded their ships with booty.[171] Many perished, perhaps in a sea battle with Odaenathus' forces, or possibly they were shipwrecked.[171]

• Roman conspiracy: the seventh-century historian John of Antioch accused Gallienus of being behind the assassination.[178] A passage in the work of the Anonymus post Dionem speaks of a certain "Rufinus" who orchestrated the assassination on his own initiative, then explained his actions to the Emperor who condoned them.[176] This account has Rufinus ordering the murder of an older Odaenathus out of fear that he would rebel, and has the younger Odaenathus complaining to the Emperor.[note 31][178] Since the older Odaenathus (Odaenathus I) has proven to be a fictional character, the story is ignored by most scholars.[183] However, the younger Odaenathus could be an oblique reference to Vaballathus and Rufinus could be identified with Cocceius Rufinus, the Roman governor of Arabia in 261–262. The evidence for such a Roman conspiracy is weak.[183]

Maeonius as depicted in the Promptuarii Iconum Insigniorum

• Family feud: according to Zonaras, Odaenathus' nephew misbehaved during a lion hunt.[184] He made the first attack and killed the animal to the dismay of the King.[185] Odaenathus warned his nephew, who ignored the warning and repeated the act twice more, causing the King to deprive him of his horse, a great insult in the East.[185][186] The nephew threatened Odaenathus and was put in chains as a result. Herodianus asked his father to forgive his cousin and his request was granted. However, as the King was drinking, the nephew approached him with a sword and killed him along with Herodianus.[185] The bodyguard immediately executed the nephew.[185]
• Zenobia: the wife of Odaenathus was accused by the Augustan History of having formerly conspired with Maeonius, as Herodianus was her stepson and she could not accept that he was the heir to her husband instead of her own children.[178] However, there is no suggestion in the Augustan History that Zenobia was directly involved in her husband's murder;[186] the act is attributed to Maeonius' degeneracy and jealousy.[178] Those accounts by the Augustan History can be dismissed as fiction.[187] The hints in modern scholarship that Zenobia had a hand in the assassination out of her desire to rule the empire and her dismay at her husband's pro-Roman policy can be dismissed as there was no reversal of that policy during the first years following Odaenathus' death.[176]
• Persian agents: the possibility of a Persian involvement exists, but the outcome of the assassination would not have served Shapur I unless a pro-Persian monarch was established on the Palmyrene throne.[188]
• Palmyrene traitors: another possibility would be Palmyrenes dissatisfied with Odaenathus' reign and the changes of their city's governmental system.[186]

The historian Nathanael Andrade, noting that since the Augustan History, Zosimus, Zonaras, and Syncellus all refer to a family feud or a domestic conspiracy in their writings, they must have been recounting an early tradition regarding the assassination. Also, the story of Rufinus is a clue to tensions between Odaenathus and the Roman court.[189] The mint of Antioch on the Orontes ceased the production of Gallienus' coins in early 268, and while this could be related to fiscal troubles, it could also have been ordered by Zenobia in retaliation for the murder of her husband.[190] Andrade proposed that the assassination was the result of a coup conducted by Palmyrene notables in collaboration with the imperial court whose officials were dissatisfied with Odaenathus' autonomy.[191] On the other hand, Hartmann concluded that it is more probable that Odaenathus was killed in Pontus.[176]

Odaenathus, the mention of whose name alone caused the hearts of the Persians to falter. Everywhere victorious, he liberated the cities and the territories belonging to each of them and made the enemies place their salvation in their prayers rather than in the force of arms.

— Libanius, on the exploits of Odaenathus.[202]

The successes of Odaenathus are treated sceptically by a number of modern scholars.[239] According to the Augustan History, Odaenathus "captured the king's treasures and he captured, too, what the Parthian monarchs hold dearer than treasures, namely his concubines. For this reason Shapur [I] was now in greater dread of the Roman generals, and out of fear of Ballista and Odaenathus he withdrew more speedily to his kingdom."[240] Sceptical scholars, such as Martin Sprengling, considered such accounts of ancient Roman historians "poor, scanty and confused".[241] However, the coronation dedication of Herodianus' statue, which stood on the Monumental Arch of Palmyra,[132] records his defeat of the Persians, for which he was crowned,[130][128] thus providing Palmyrene evidence that explicitly mentions the war against Persia; the victory attested is probably related to the first Persian campaign and not the battle of 260.[242]

The historian Andreas Alföldi concluded that Odaenathus started his wars with Persia by attacking the retreating Persian army at Edessa in 260. Such an attack is rejected by sceptical scholars; Sprengling noted that no evidence exists for such an engagement.[241] The Iranologist Walter Bruno Henning considered the accounts of Odaenathus' attack in 260 greatly exaggerated. Shapur I mentions that he made the Roman prisoners build him the Band-e Kaisar near Susiana, and built a city for those prisoners, which evolved into the current Gundeshapur; Henning cited those arguments as evidence for Shapur I's success in bringing his army and prisoners back home and Roman exaggeration regarding Odaenathus' successes.[243] Sprengling suggested that Shapur I did not have enough troops to garrison the Roman cities he occupied, and he was old and focused on religion and building; hence, Odaenathus merely retook abandoned cities and marched on Ctesiphon to heal Rome's pride, while being careful not to disturb the Persians and their emperor.[244] Other scholars, such as Jacob Neusner, noted that while the accounts of the 260 engagement might be an exaggeration, Odaenathus did become a real threat to Persia when he regained the cities formerly taken by Shapur I and besieged Ctesiphon.[245] The historian Louis Feldman rejected Henning's proposals;[246] and the historian Trevor Bryce concluded that whatever the nature of Odaenathus' campaigns, they led to the restoration of all Roman territories occupied by Shapur I – Rome was free of Persian threats for several years after Odaenathus' wars.[239]