Did the Persians use chemical warfare against the Romans?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American



On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


These days, chemical warfare is commonly associated with the modern world, such as the gassing of enemy troops in World War I and the Kurds in 1987-88 by Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq. But archaeological evidence suggests that it was used in antiquity by Persian warriors when the soldiers suffocated their Roman enemies using bitumen, or pitch (a tarry, sour oil), and sulfur crystals.

Archeologist Simon James of the University of Leicester in England says he discovered a "crime scene" indicating that Persian warriors suffocated 20 Roman soldiers in a Syrian mine. The attack occurred around A.D. 256, when soldiers from the Persian Sassanid Empire invaded Dura-Europos, a highly coveted city on the Euphrates River that had previously been conquered by the Romans.

Although the bodies, stacked atop one another, were discovered in an underground tunnel in the 1930s, James went back to investigate the cause of their deaths. He didn't buy earlier theories that the Romans had died when the tunnel collapsed.

After reviewing archival records showing sulfur crystals and a jar of pitch in the mine, he came up with another theory: The Persians gassed the group to death using highly flammable pitch and sulfur crystals that created sulfur dioxide when the chemicals were burned in a controlled fire. The Persians then piled the corpses on top of one another, using them as a kind of fortress to keep out approaching Romans, and set a large fire to collapse the tunnel.

"We know from the finds that the Persians had bitumen, or pitch, and sulfur crystals—highly inflammable, smoke-generating chemicals," James tells ScientificAmerican.com. "If you'll excuse the pun, it's a smoking gun. Deliberately chucking sulfur crystals onto a fire; in modern terms we call this chemical warfare."

Written texts suggest that the ancient Greeks had engaged in chemical warfare several hundred years earlier, using braziers (pans for holding hot coals), bellows and burning feathers against the Romans in 189 B.C. at the siege of Ambracia. But James says that although this is the earliest archaeological evidence of chemical warfare, no accounts of the battle recorded by participants or witnesses have been unearthed.

His interpretation shows that "you can create a real story out of battlefield patterns that archaeologists find," Melissa Connor, director of forensic science at Nebraska Wesleyan University in Lincoln, told Science News.

James presented his findings last weekend at the Archaeological Institute of America meeting in Philadelphia.

Diagram of proposed gassing of Romans at Dura-Europos, courtesy of Simon James

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe