Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 3.djvu/730

Rh 718 SASSANIDAE. were perpetrated against the Chinstians in that country also ; and the hostility which had existed between Rome and Persia ever since the death of Constantine, was now changed into a war of exter- mination. An account of these wars has been given in the lives of the emperors Constantius II. and his successors. We shall therefore only men- tion a few additional facts. Prince Hormisdas mentioned above was in the Roman army, and fought valiantly against his countrymen, whence we may conclude that, had Constantius reaped laurels instead of thistles in this war, he would have put the fugitive prince on the throne of Persia. Sapor, although victorious in the open field, could do nothing against the strong bulwarks of Nisibis and other fortresses, and consequently derived no advantages from his victories. The conquest of Armenia was his only trophy ; in his bloody zeal against the Christians in that country, he went so far as to order all Armenian and Greek books to be burnt, but even the barbarous murder of his (only.^) son, who had accidentally been made a prisoner by the Romans, and was put to death by order of Constantius, could not justify the still more savage conduct of Sapor against so many innocent and defenceless Christians. In 358, Constantius sued for peace, but was startled when the Persian ambassador, Narses, de- livered in Constantinople the conditions of Sapor, who demanded only Mesopotamia, Armenia, and the five provinces beyond tlie Tigris, although as the legitimate successor of Cyrus, he said that he had a right to all Asia and Europe as far as the river Strymon in Macedonia. Constantius en- deavoured to obtain better terms ; but the negotia- tions of his ambassadors in Persia were frustrated through intrigue and perfidy ; and the war was continued as before, and with the same disadvan- tage to the Romans. In 359, Sapor took Amida by storm, and Singara, Berabde, and other places yielded to him in the following year. The death of Constantius and .the accession of Julian made no change. The fate of Julian is known. He might have avoided it by accepting the proposals of peace which Sapor made him immediately after his accession, but he nobly rejected them, and caused his ruin although he did not deserve it. Jovian, to secure his own accession, made that famous treaty with Sapor for which he has been blamed so much, and ceded to him the five provinces beyond the Tigris, and the fortresses of Nisibis, Singara, &c. Iberia and Armenia were left to their fate ; and were completely reduced by Sapor in 365, and the following year. A war with the Caucasian nations, occasioned through the subjugation of Ar- menia, and another with the Arsacidae in distant Bactria, which might have had its cause in the same circumstance, filled the latter years of the reign of Sapor, who died in 381. Sapor has been sumamed the Great, and no Persian king had ever caused such terror to Rome as this monarch. 10. Ardishir or Artaxerxes II., the suc- cessor of Sapor the Great, reigned from a. d. 381 — 385. He was a prince of royal blood, but his descent is doubtful, and he was decidedly no son of Sapor. The peace of 363 being strictly kept by the Romans, he had no pretext for making war upon them, if he felt inclined to do so, and we pass on to 11. Shapur or Sapor III., who reigned from A. D. 385 — 390. According to Agathias (iv. p. 1 36, ed. Paris) he was the son of Sapor the SASSANIDAE. Great ; but according to the Persian historians, who, in matters of genealogy, deserve full credit, he was the son of one Shapur Zulaktaf, a royal prince. Shapur was anxious to be on good terms with the emperor Theodosius the Great, and sent a solemn embassy with splendid presents to him at Constantinople, which was returned by a Greek embassy headed by Stilicho going to Persia. Owing to these diplomatic transactions, an arrangement was made in 384, according to which Armenia and Iberia recovered their independence. 12. Bahram or Varanes IV., reigned from A. D. 390 — 404, or perhaps not so long. He was the brother of Sapor III., and founded Kerman- shah, still a flourishing town. This is recorded in an inscription on a monument near Kermanshah, which has been copied by European travellers, and translated by Silvestre de Sacy. 13. Yezdijird, or Jesdigerd I. {*I(r5iyepSr}s), sumamed Ulathim, or the Sinner, the son or brother of the preceding, reigned from a. d. 404, or earlier, to 420 or 421. He is commonly called Yesdigerd. He stood on friendly terms with the emperor Arcadius, who, it is said, appointed him the guardiuu of his infant son and successor, Theodosius t'le Younger. We refer to the life of Arcadius for more information respecting this strange story. Yesdigerd is described by the Eastern writers as a cruel and extravagant man, whose death was hailed by his subjects as a bless- ing, but the Western writers speak of him as a model of wisdom and moderation. If the latter are rigfit, they had perhaps in view the peace of a hundred years, which, through the instrumentality of the empress Pulcheria, Arcadius is said to have concluded with him. But if we admit the correctness of the former opinion, we are at a loss to explain it, unless we presume that the Persian fireworship- pers cast disgrace upon the name of their sovereign because he showed himself cruel against the Chris- tians, and this we can hardly admit. It is more probable that he was represented as a tyrant, in consequence of having dealt severely with the powerful aristocratic party. As to the Christians, he was for several years their decided friend, till Abdas, bishop of Susa, wantonly destroyed a fire- temple, and haughtily refused to rebuild it when the king ordered him to do so. His punishment was death, and one or two (Sozom. ix. 4) persecu- tions ensued against the Christians. 14. Bahram or Varanes V., sumamed Go ur, or the " Wild Ass," on account of his passion for the chase of that animal, reigned from a. d. 420 or 421 till 440. He was the eldest son of Yesdi- gerd I., and inherited from him the hatred of the aristocracy, who tried, but in vain, to fix the diadem on the head of Chosroes or Khosrew, a royal prince. In their civil contest Bahram was vic- torious. The persecutions against the Christians were continued by him to such an extent, that thousands of his subjects took refuge within the Roman dominions. He showed the same intole- rant and fanatical spirit towards the Arsacid Ardishir or Artaxerxes, whom he had put on the throne of Armenia, and whom he endeavoured to convert by compulsion. Seeing his dominions de- populated by a constant tide of emigration, he claimed his fugitive subjects back from Constan- tinople, a demand which Theodosius nobly declined to comply with. The consequence was a war, which broke out in 421, or at least shortly after