Page:Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire vol 4 (1897).djvu/280

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
258
THE DECLINE AND FALL
a line of two thousand elephants.[1] The Persians were twice circumvented, in a situation which made valour useless and flight impossible; and the double victory of the Huns was achieved by military stratagem. They dismissed their royal captive after he had submitted to adore the majesty of a Barbarian; and the humiliation was poorly evaded by the casuistical subtilty of the Magi, who instructed Perozes to direct his attention to the rising sun. The indignant successor of Cyrus forgot his danger and his gratitude: he renewed the attack with headstrong fury, and lost both his army and his [A.D. 448] life.[2] The death of Perozes abandoned Persia to her foreign and domestic enemies; and twelve years of confusion elapsed before his son Cabades or Kobad could embrace any designs of ambition or revenge. The Persian war. A.D. 302-505 The unkind parsimony of Anastasius was the motive or pretence of a Roman war;[3] the Huns and Arabs marched under the Persian standard; and the fortifications of Armenia and Mesopotamia were at that time in a ruinous or imperfect condition. The emperor returned his thanks to the governor and people of Martyropolis for the prompt surrender of a city which could not be successfully defended, and the conflagration of Theodosiopolis might justify the conduct of their prudent neighbours. [Aug., A.D. 502] Amida sustained a long and destructive siege: at the end of three months the loss of fifty thousand of
  1. The Indo-Scythæ continued to reign from the time of Augustus (Dionys. Perieget. 1088, with the Commentary of Eustathius, in Hudson, Geograph. Minor. tom. iv.) to that of the elder Justin (Cosmas, Topograph. Christ. l. xi. p. 338, 339). On their origin and conquests, see d'Anville (sur l'Inde, p. 18, 45, &c. 69, 85, 89). In the second century they were masters of Larice or Guzerat.
  2. See the fate of Phirouz or Perozes, and its consequences, in Procopius (Persic. l. i. c. 3-6), who may be compared with the fragments of Oriental history (d'Herbelot, Bibliot. Orient. p. 351, and Texeria, History of Persia, translated or abridged by Stevens, l. i. c. 32, p. 132-138). The chronology is ably ascertained by Asseman (Bibliot. Orient. tom. iii. p. 396-427). [The death of Perozes occurred soon after the total eclipse of the sun on Jan. 14, 484. His successor Ralash reigned to 488; and Cobad's first year was counted from July 22, 488. See Nöldeke, Gesch. der Perser, &c. p. 425-7.]
  3. The Persian war, under the reigns of Anastasius and Justin, may be collected from Procopius (Persic. l. i. c. 7, 8, 9), Theophanes (in Chronograph, p. 124-127), Evagrius (l. iii. c. 37), Marcellinus (in Chron. p. 47), and Josua Stylites apud Asseman. (tom. i. p. 272-281). [Josua Stylites (ed. Wright, see App. 1) describes, with considerable detail, the two sieges of Amida, (1) by the Persians (Oct. 502-Jan. 503), and (2) by the Romans, under "Patricius" and Hypatius (503), and the siege of Edessa (504-5). He relates a defeat sustained by Patricius at Opadna (=al-Fudain, acc. to Nöldeke, on the river Chaboras) in A.D. 503; and an unsuccessful attempt of Cobad to take Constantina. The Continuator of Zacharias of Mytilene gives an account of the war and also describes at length the first siege of Amida. The account in Evagrius is taken from Eustathius of Epiphania. On the character of Cobad, cp. Nöldeke (Gesch. der Perser, &c. p. 143), who concludes that he was energetic and able.]