OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE 393 archbishop Isaac, whose sanction they earnestly solicited, is ex- [sahag] pressive of the character of a superstitious people. He deplored the manifest and inexcusable vices of Artasires ; and declared that he should not hesitate to accuse him before the tribunal of a Christian emperor who would punish, without destroying, the sinner. "Our king," continued Isaac, "is too much addicted to licentious pleasures, but he has been purified in the holy waters of baptism. He is a lover of women, but he does not adore the fire or the elements. He may deserve the reproach of lewdness, but he is an undoubted Catholic ; and his faith is pure, though his manners are flagitious. I will never consent to abandon my sheep to the rage of devouring wolves ; and you would soon re- pent your rash exchange of the infirmities of a believer for the specious virtues of an heathen." ^^ Exasperated by the firmness of Isaac, the factious nobles accused both the king and the arch- bishop as the secret adherents of the emperor ; and absurdly rejoiced in the sentence of condemnation, which, after a partial hearing, was solemnly pronounced by Bahrain himself. The descendants of Arsaces were degraded from the royal dignity,^^ which they had possessed above five hundred and sixty years, ^" [sso] and the dominions of the unfortunate Ai'tasires, under the new and significant appellation of Persarmenia, were reduced into the form of a province. This usurpation excited the jealousy of [c. ad. 428] the Roman government ; but the i-ising disputes were soon ter- minated by an amicable, though unequal, partition of the ancient kingdom of Armenia; and a territorial acquisition, which Augustus might have despised, reflected some lustre on the de- clining empire of the younger Theodosius. 85 Moses Choren. 1. iii. c. 63, p. 316. According to the institution of St. Gregory the apostle of Armenia, the archbishop was always of the royal family ; a circumstance which, in some degree, corrected the influence of the sacerdotal character, and united the mitre with the crown.
- ^ A branch of the royal house of Arsaces still subsisted with the rank and
possessions (as it should seem) of Armenian satraps. See Moses Choren. i. iii. c. 65, p. 321.
- ^ Valarsaces was appointed king of Armenia by his brother the Parthian
monarch, immediately after the defeat of Antiochus Sidetes (Moses Choren. 1. ii. c. ii. p. 85), one hundred and thirty years before Christ. Without depending on the various and contradictory periods of the reigns of the last kings, we may be assured that the ruin of the Armenian kingdom happened after the council of Chalcedon, a.d. 431 (I. iii. c. 61, p. 312), and under Veramus or Bahram, king of Persia (1. iii. c. 64, p. 317), who reigned from A.D. 420 to 440 [see Appendix 25]. See Assemanni, Bibliot. Oriental, torn. iii. p. 396.
