Flavius Arcadius Augustus (377/378-May 1, 408) Eastern Roman Empire The emperor, who ruled half of the Roman Empire, ascended the throne in 395 until his death in 408. Arcadius Theodosius I (Theodosius I, 347-395, 379-395 Roman emperor), the eldest son of Aelia Flaccilla (385), and the elder brother of Flavius Honorius, 384-423, 395-423 Western Roman emperor. In 383, Emperor Arcadius Gratian The emperor got it after he died“ Augustus ”He was only 5 years old at that time. But not until 395 Theodosius I When the emperor died, he became the supreme monarch of the Eastern Empire. During the same period, the emperor of the Western Empire who ruled the country was his 11 year old brother Horoliu, Flavius Augustus 。 Although Arcadius was nominally the emperor of the Eastern Empire, he basically did not ask about politics, but left the state and military affairs to his subordinates.
Coins of the reigning period After Rufinus was deposed for his evil deeds, Arcadius trusted Eutropius, the eunuch, who died in 399. The rule of two favorite ministers made Arcadius rule Eastern Roman Empire For 14 years, politics has been in a dark state, and its weak style has become the object that most of the Eastern Roman emperors followed. Even so, the rule of Emperor Arcadius was still constantly controlled by his wife Aelia Eudoxia and the commander of the guard, Flavius Anthemius (died in 414). He himself ruled the vast empire in name only, and it was not until 408 that this devout Christian died. After his death, the prince Theodosius II (Theodosius II) succeeded to the throne. Because she was young (only seven years old), Queen Eudocesia was regent. Arcadius' "Solitary"
In 408 AD, before the death of the Emperor Arcadius of the East Rome, he made a will to entrust his youngest son Theodosius II to his old enemy Ishmael I, the king of Persia in Sassania. On the one hand, the eastern part of the Roman Empire would not regard the western part of the empire as its own supporters because of the serious split between the eastern and western parts of the Roman Empire and the tense relations; On the other hand, due to the fact that East Rome and Sassanid Persian The relationship between Arcadius and Sassanian was more relaxed, which made it possible for Arcadius to entrust his youngest son and empire to the King Sassanian. As far as Ishiwan I, the king of Sassanian Persia, was concerned, Sassanian Persia's territorial and economic demands had been greatly satisfied in the course of its confrontation with Rome. At the same time, Sassanian Persia itself was also facing internal and external contradictions, and he had no reason to take the initiative to break the peace situation. The perfect ending of Arcadius' "Toku" incident not only made the rule of the eastern Roman Empire achieve a smooth transition, but also had an important promoting significance for the development of late ancient Christianity in the East, had an important impact on the trade exchanges between the East and the West in late ancient times, and provided a new paradigm for the change of late ancient state relations. The first record of the incident of the eastern Roman emperor Arcadius "Tuo Gu" in the Persian king Ishmael I of Sassania is from the book War History written by the Byzantine historian Procopius (about 500-565 years): "When the Roman emperor Arcadius died in Byzantium (there was a son Theodosius, who was not weaned) He was deeply worried not only for his son, but also for his government. He did not know how to make wise arrangements for both. Because he believes that if he arranges a co ruler for Theodosius, he is actually destroying his own son through an enemy in a royal cloak. If he let his son rule the empire alone, then many people, as they may expect, will take advantage of their children's helplessness to try to ascend the throne. These people will oppose the government, and after destroying Theodosius, they will easily make themselves tyrants, because this boy has no relatives as his guardian in Byzantium (ε 'π i'τρ o π o). Arcadius did not expect the boy's uncle Honorius [7] to help him, because the situation in Italy was already very troublesome. He was also worried about the attitude of the Mides [8], and worried that these barbarians would overthrow the young emperor and cause irreparable harm to the Romans. When Arcadius faced this dilemma, although he did not show great wisdom in other matters, he made a plan to ensure that his son and throne were not in trouble, either because he had talked with some knowledgeable people such as the king's advisers, or because some divine inspiration came to him. When drafting his will, he designated this child as his heir to the throne, but let Issyar, the Persian king, become his son's guardian. In his will, he sincerely asked Issyar to do his best to protect his empire for Theodosius. After arranging his private and imperial affairs in this way, Arcadius died. However, when he saw the document officially handed to him, the Persian king Ishmael immediately showed an amazing and extraordinary virtue, although his noble character had won him a great reputation before he became a ruler. Because he faithfully abided by the will of Arcadius and kept the policy of peaceful coexistence with the Romans, he saved the empire for Theodosius. In fact, he immediately wrote a letter to the Senate, expressing his willingness to become the guardian of Theodosius and threatening to wage war against anyone who tried to frame the latter. " [9]
After Prokopius, Agatius (about 532-579/582) also mentioned this event. He wrote that the event that Arcadius appointed Issimus I as the guardian of Theodosius II and the whole Roman country (φ ν'λ α ξ and κηδ ε μ ω'ν) at the end of his life, "has been passed down from generation to generation and is still recited by the upper class and ordinary people of Rome. But I have not encountered it in any literature or in the works of historians, or even in those documenting the death of Arcadius, except Procopius. Prokopius has read almost all historical works with his encyclopedic knowledge. I am not surprised that he should have found the written version of this event in the works of some earlier historians that I have not yet known. ". But he also believed that: "It is almost unreasonable to entrust a person's close relatives to a foreigner, a barbarian, a ruler of a hostile country, a person who is unknown in terms of honor and justice, and most importantly, the person is a follower of a false religion." [10] Agatius' words, It became the direct reason for later scholars to doubt the historical authenticity of the event.
After Agatius, the Byzantine chronicler Theophanes (about 758/760-817/818) also recorded the event. Moreover, Theophanes mentioned for the first time that Isimus I sent an eunuch named Antiochus to Byzantium as his representative and became the steward (ε 'π I'τ ρ o π o) and educator (παδααγω γ ó) of Theodosius II, and Isimus I claimed to be the guardian (κ o νρ τ τ ω ω ρ ρ) of Theodosius II. [11] Since then, the 11th century Byzantine historian Caderinus, in addition to describing the same event as Theophanes, also mentioned that Arcadius sent 1000 pounds of gold to Ishiwe I to ensure the execution of his will. [12] In the 12th century, the chronicler and theologian Zonaras said that Theodosius II was brought up by his sister Pulcheria, while Ishmael I sent Antiochus as his protector and guardian (φ ν'λ α ξ and κηδ ε μ ω'ν). [13] At the same time, Manasseus of Constantinople also recorded the arrangements after the death of Arcadius and the role of Isius I, also known as Isius I as the protector (φ ν'λ α ξ), but did not mention the story of Antiochus. [14] Finally, the Greek church historian who mentioned the event was Nicephorus Calistus Kisantoprus, who called Ishmael I as his guardian (κ ο ρρ τ ωρρ, κηδεμω＇ν)， The story of Antiochus is consistent with Theophanes' description. [15]
In addition to the Greek language materials, the 13th century Oriental Syrian scholar Bar Hebress also mentioned the "Toru" incident in his chronicles. His description is similar to Theophanes, but does not mention the story of Antiochus. [16]
According to Agatius, it seems that the story of "orphaning" is more oral in society. Prokopius' works are the only written records he can see, although he also speculates that Prokopius has its earlier written historical sources. Antiochus did not appear in any of the earliest written records, which also makes people doubt whether he is a character in the oral "Tuo Gu" story. A common feature of oral stories is that the version is not unique. The details of "Tuogu" recorded by Byzantine historians in the middle period are not uniform, which may indicate that they were influenced by different versions of oral historical materials. We can't rule out the possibility that Antiochus is a character added artificially during the spread of the story of "Togo".
Despite the complexity of the above details, the basic event of Arcadias' will to "orphan" Ishiwan is consistent in all records, and Prokopius, the earliest record of this event, is about a century away from the time of Arcadias and Ishiwan. In other words, people's memory of basic historical facts has only experienced about three generations of transmission, and is still within a relatively accurate time span. As for Agatius' query, it was not the reliability of Prokous' record, but the fact that Arcadius preferred to entrust his close relatives to the monarch of the enemy country, which made him feel strange. In his time of life, the relationship between Rome and Persia was once again tense. It was normal for him to have such doubts, but this did not mean that such an event would not occur in the fifth century.
In fact, it is quite interesting to know why Arcadius "went to orphan", and whether the reason for his "going to orphan" is as simple as Arcadius's "worry" recorded by Procopius? Why is Ishmael "entrusted"? Is it just because of his "amazing and extraordinary virtue" that he abides by his promise and keeps peace with Rome for a long time? What was the impact of the "Tuogu" incident on the relationship between East Rome and Sassanian Persia at that time and the trend of the late ancient world? These questions deserve our further inquiry and in-depth exploration.
2、 Arcadius' "Solitary" is a helpless act [1]
The Roman Empire and Sassanian Persian Kingdom have always been old enemies. At the beginning of Ishmael I's accession to the throne (399), the Roman society had a fear that he would become another Shapur II. [17] Why, then, was Arcadius willing to entrust his young son to Ishmael I before his death? This was actually determined by the situation of the East Roman Empire itself at that time.
First, after 395 AD, the eastern and western parts of the Roman Empire were split and relations were tense. East Rome would not regard West Rome as its own supporters. After the death of Theodosius I in 395 AD, the western Rome was ruled by Honorius, who was only ten years old, and the eastern Rome was ruled by Arcadius, who was seventeen or eight years old. As the two were still young, the actual rulers of the eastern and western parts of the empire were not the emperor himself. Stilicho actually controlled and took charge of the western part of the empire until A.D. 408. He claimed that when Theodosius I died, he appointed him the guardian of both Honorius and Arcadius. Stiliko had been trying to control the eastern part of the empire, but he never succeeded. After the second expedition of Stilico to Alaric in 397 AD, the eastern government subsequently encouraged Gildo to rebel in Africa, and the relationship between East and West Rome deteriorated to the point of maritime trade embargo. Stiliko constantly pursued the policy of controlling the eastern part of Ilikum, especially in the period of 405-408 AD, he was ready to control the area by force, which further intensified the contradiction between the eastern and western parts of the empire. It can be said that the relationship between the eastern and western parts of the empire at this time, such as foreign enemies, was not excessive. [18] Therefore, Arcadius and his government could not regard the West Rome as their own dependence and entrust the young son and the East Rome government to the West Rome court, which was tantamount to "introducing wolves into the house" for them. At the same time, Alaric invaded Italy twice at the beginning of the fifth century, and the western part of the empire was even more trapped in the vortex of barbarian invasion and the so-called usurpation of Stilico in 405-408 AD. [19] As Prokopius said, at the beginning of the 5th century, Western Rome was in danger of survival. The situation in Italy was very bad. Arcadius could not rely on the help of the Emperor Honorius of Western Rome. [20]
Secondly, after 363 AD, the relationship between Rome and Sassanian Persia has been in a relatively relaxed state, which makes it possible for Arcadius to entrust his young son and empire to the Sassanian Persian king who has relaxed relations with him. The relationship between Rome and Sassanian Persia has been in a fluctuating state of relaxation and tension for a long time. Before the third century and the second half of the fourth century, Sassanian Persia and the Roman Empire clashed with each other, and the relationship between the two countries was mainly hostile. Ardashir I, the founder of Sassanian Persia, tried to invade Armenia, Mesopotamia and other eastern border areas of Rome many times during his reign. During the period of Shapur I, the Roman emperor Philip was forced to sign a peace treaty with him, ceding Greater Armenia, later Persia Armenia, to Sassania Persia. [21] But after the death of Shapur I, Sassanopos experienced a period of political turmoil. After Daikeri first ascended the throne, the Romans forced the Sassanian king Narses to sign a treaty of cession in 299 [22], which was a turning point in the Roman Persian relationship. Later, Sassanian Persia failed to change its relatively weak situation in the relations between the two countries for a long time. [23] 363 AD was another turning point in the relationship between Rome and Persia. After Julian was wounded and died in his expedition to Persia, Jovian was forced to sign a treaty of land cession with Sassanian Persia after he ascended the throne. From then on until the 6th century, the relationship between Rome and Sassanian Persia in the eastern frontier was basically peaceful, except that Bahram V briefly invaded Rome from 421 to 422 A.D. and Ishmael II briefly invaded Rome in 439 A.D. [24] After Shapur III ascended the throne in 383 AD, the relationship between Rome and Sassanian Persia improved, and the two sides began to send envoys to each other for consultation and other matters. [25] After the accession of Ishiwan I to the throne in 399 AD, the way in which the two sides sent envoys to communicate was further developed, and the friendly relations between the two countries were further consolidated. At the beginning of Ishiwan I's accession to the throne, the Eastern Roman government sent envoys to Sassanbos to congratulate and resolve disputes, and strive for tolerance for Christians. The mission is said to be led by Anthemius, but it is certain that Marutha, the Bishop of Armenia, is a member of the mission. According to records, he cured the sick son of Yishihou I who could not be cured by Zoroastrianism on the road, which may also relieve Yishihou I's long-term headache. This left a deep impression on Isimu I and therefore promised to release the Roman prisoners captured from the Huns in 395/396 AD. Lu Lu's outstanding performance has laid a good foundation for the development of friendly relations between the two countries. [26] Since then, the two sides have frequently exchanged envoys. From 404 to 414 AD, the government of East Rome was led by Anthemius. Anthemius was rich in management experience and established a lasting peace with Sassanopos during his administration. [27]
Therefore, when the eastern part of the empire and the western part of the empire were regarded as enemies, and the western part of the empire was unable to survive on its own, and on the other hand, the relationship with Sassanian Persia was harmonious, for the sake of a smooth transition to the throne, in order to ensure that Sassanian Persia would not enter after his death, and in order to continue to maintain the friendly relationship between the two countries, it was likely that before his death, Arcadius had "no choice" The land "entrusted" its young son to Isimu I.
3、 "Entrustment" of Yisimao I is the best choice
In Sassanian Persia, Ishmael I was willing to act as the guardian of Theodosius II when he was young, and kept a long-term peace with Rome. He did not take the opportunity to attack the eastern frontier of Rome, which was also the result of multiple factors.
First of all, as mentioned earlier, 363 AD was a turning point in the Roman Persian relationship. The peace treaty signed between Jovian and Sassanian Persia, to a large extent, met Sassanian Persia's long-standing demands, satisfied Sassanian Persia with its vested interests, and was unwilling to destroy this peaceful state.
In 299 AD, Narsese was forced to sign a treaty of cession with Dioclee, which stipulated that: 1. Sassanopos ceded five provinces beyond the Tigris River, including Intilene, Sophene, Arzanena, Corduena and Zabdicena, to the Romans; 2. The Tigris River is the border between the two countries; 3. The Zintha on the border of Media is the border of Armenia; 4. The king of Iberia accepted the symbol of his kingship from the Romans; 5. Nisibis on the Tigris River is the only trading point. [28]
According to the peace treaty, Sassanian Persia not only lost important border territory and control over important neighbors, but also became the only trade point between the two countries, which made the Romans enjoy the income brought by the eastern luxury trade tax alone, and Sassanian Persia also suffered major economic losses. In fact, the clause that Nisibis was "the only trading point" was opposed by Nalses at that time. [29] Since then, Sassanopos has been trying to reverse this situation. After Shapur II ascended the throne, he besieged Nisibis three times to recover the land lost from Nalses, [30] but suffered setbacks. Julian was injured and died, which brought opportunity to Sassanopos. In order to withdraw the army from Persia as soon as possible to reduce losses, Jovian soon signed a treaty with Shapur II. According to Marcelinus, the contents of the treaty are roughly as follows: 1. The Romans ceded five provinces beyond the Tigris [31] and 15 fortresses, as well as Nisibis, Singara and the very important fortress Castra Maurorum to Sassanbos; 2. Allow the Romans to withdraw the troops stationed in the above-mentioned fortresses, and withdraw the residents from Nisibis and Singara; 3. The Romans will not help the Armenian king Arsaces against the Persians; 4. The term of the agreement is 30 years. [32]
According to the peace treaty, Sassanopos not only took back the territory lost before, but also gained more. The cession of cities such as Nisipes and their surrounding territories destroyed the Roman defense system in eastern Mesopotamia, and greatly enhanced Sassanian Persia's defense against Adiabene and Assyria. Not only that, the cession of Nicibis also made Rome no longer have the monopoly power over cross-border trade income, which greatly hit Rome's cross-border trade. [33] Since then, Nisibis has been under the control of the Persians, and neither side has signed any treaty to change the border of Mesopotamia. Under the condition that both territorial and economic demands have been met, the Yisi Hou I has no reason to take the initiative to break the peace situation.
Secondly, Sassanian Persia also faced internal and external problems at this time. Internally, Ishmael I, like all Sassanian monarchs, had to face an independent and irritable aristocratic class, and a Zoroastrian priestly class committed to developing its own religion into the only religious belief in Persia and its affiliated areas. He needed to limit the influence of your family and the priestly class. [34] In order to get rid of the influence and control of the nobility and the priesthood, Ishiwan I needed to win the support of minorities in Sassanian Persia, such as Jews and Christians. At that time, Rome was the main patron of Christians, so Ishiwan I needed to maintain a good relationship with Rome. More importantly, in addition to relying on Christians and Jews, the military power of Saracen of al Hira [35] was the main dependence of Ishmael I against Persian nobles. Ishmael I needed a lot of money to consolidate his relationship with the Saracens of Sheila, so maintaining friendly relations with Rome could enable him to obtain a large amount of diplomatic and economic compensation from Constantinople. [36]
Externally, in 395 and 396 AD, the Huns invaded Armenia and Mesopotamia, plundering as far as Ctesiphon, and Cappadocia, Galatia and even Syria in Rome were also affected. [37] The invasion of the Huns put great pressure on the northeastern border area of Sassanian Persia. At the same time, Rome also needs to guard against the invasion of nomadic people from the north. Therefore, the common interests of Rome and Sassanian Persia lie in protecting the Caucasus passage and resisting the invasion of northern enemies. Moreover, although the peace treaty in 363 AD weakened the defense of Rome's eastern frontier, the Romans began to strengthen their defense in the eastern frontier ten years after the signing of the peace treaty. [38] Therefore, it is very difficult for Rome and Sassanian Persia to invade or conquer each other at this time. It is ideal to stick to the peace treaty and keep peace.
Finally, Yisimao I's acceptance of "orphanage" is also related to his personality and experience. Yisihou I stopped the long-term persecution of Christians in Sassanian Persia after he ascended the throne. In Sassanian Persia and Arab materials, he was called a "sinner", because he was overly tolerant of non Zoroastrian beliefs. [39] Ishmael I no longer regards Christians as strangers and enemies of the kingdom. Although there are the aforementioned political reasons, it also reflects his inclusive character from the side. Most of the previous Sassanian Persian monarchs met the needs of Sassanian nobles and priests by waging wars and obtaining booty, thus consolidating their own throne. However, Ishmael I took non war measures. Even if he used the military power of the Saracens, he only used deterrence rather than actual war. [40] No fierce war occurred during his reign. Christians also played an active role in this period, promoting the development of friendly relations between the two countries. In addition to the aforementioned road, it is said that the Persian Bishop Yabalaha also showed Ishmael I another miracle, which won favor for the Romans. [41]
Therefore, on the premise that the peace treaty in 363 AD basically met Sassanian Persia's long-term territorial and economic demands, he also saw the "miracle" of Christians in the face of external interference from northern nations, internal need to weaken the influence and control of Persian nobles and priests, and need to maintain cooperation with Rome. To accept Arcadius's "orphan" is the best choice made by Ishmael I, who has an inclusive character.
4、 Arcadius's "Solitary" and the Changes of the Eastern and Western Situations in Late Ancient Times
Arcadius' "togetherness" had a profound impact on the changes of the late ancient East West situation, and also provided a new dimension for understanding the changes of the late ancient East West situation. First of all, for the Eastern Roman government, after the death of Arcadius, the young Theodosius II was neither hurt by the conspirators from Constantinople, nor "unified" by the Western Rome, nor threatened by Sassanian Persia. The rule of the Eastern Roman Empire achieved a smooth transition. During the reign of Ishmael I, he maintained a long-term peace with Rome, and the peace of the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire won enough breathing time for the government of Theodosius II, so that East Rome could concentrate its military forces against the Huns led by Uldin, and avoid a two front war. In 408/409 AD, the Huns invaded the Roman Empire again. This time, under the leadership of Urdin, the Huns crossed the Danube, first occupied Moesia, and then invaded Thrace. Urdin claimed that if he wanted, he could conquer every land under the sun. [42] Although Urdin's invasion was finally crushed by the Romans, it also exposed the fragility of the frontier defense of the Roman Empire. Antamius then strengthened the frontier defense, especially the strength of the Danube fleet. In 413 AD, the walls of Constantinople were also rebuilt and added. [43] If Arcadius did not "help the orphan", then Theodosius II would probably face the threat of other potential usurpers and the ambition of unification from the western part of the empire at the beginning of his accession to the throne, on the one hand, on the other hand, he would also face aggression from Sassanian Persia and the Huns outside, In this case, whether the East Roman government can survive is a question, and whether it can be revived in the future is even more unknown.
Secondly, the "Tuogu" incident has an important significance in promoting the development of late ancient Christianity in the East. While promoting the friendly development of Roman Persian relations, Christians also benefited themselves greatly. This kind of friendly relationship between Rome and Persia enabled Christianity to develop rapidly in the East, especially in Sassanian Persia, where the influence of Christianity even exceeded that of Zoroastrianism during the reign of Ishmael I. In 409 AD, Ishmael I officially allowed Christians to openly believe in Sassanian Persia and rebuild Christian churches. He ordered the release of the "penitent" in prison, allowed the bishops to move freely in their parishes, and recognized the right of Christians to organize and make laws for themselves. Ishmael I officially recognized the legitimacy of Christianity in Sassanian Persia in law, which is a great progress for the Christian church that has been persecuted in Sassanian Persia since Constantine established the Christian faith in the Roman Empire, and provides a necessary foundation for the future development of Christianity in the East. [44] In 410 AD, Ishmael I also approved Maluta and others to convene a religious conference in Seleucia Ctesiphon, which resolved the dispute between eastern and western Christian churches, and established a single structure church for Christians in Sassanian Persia, which was later called the "Eastern Church". This is a milestone in the development history of the Eastern Church and Christianity in the East. [45]
Third, the event also had an important impact on the trade exchanges between the East and the West in the late ancient times. The friendly political relationship between Rome and Persia has promoted the cooperation between the two countries in the supervision of cross-border trade between the East and the West. According to the Justinian Code [46], in 408/409, Honorius and Theodosius II promulgated laws on commerce and merchants, which are as follows:
The merchants who are subject to our rule and the Persian king shall not place the market outside the place agreed in the treaty concluded with the above countries, so as to prevent the secrets of any kingdom from being disclosed. 1. Therefore, no subject of our empire will be allowed to buy or sell goods outside Nisibis, Callinicum and Artaxata, nor to trade with Persians anywhere outside the above-mentioned cities. Because both parties to the treaty know that any goods sold or purchased outside these places will be confiscated by our sacred treasury, and in addition to these goods, the money paid in cash or in kind will also be confiscated, and the perpetrators themselves will be permanently exiled; 2. The judges of both parties to the treaty and their subordinates will also be fined 30 pounds if they enter places beyond the above scope, including those who cross their borders to trade in forbidden areas in Rome or Persia; 3. But this does not apply to Persian envoys who carry goods in exchange. Out of humanity and respect for envoys, we do not deny that these people have the privilege to engage in trade outside fixed locations. Unless they stayed in a certain province for a long time in the name of an envoy and did not return to their own country. When these people participate in transactions, they must be punished by such sanctions, including those who trade with them and live with them.
This law summarizes the official guidelines for trade between Byzantium and Sassanian Persia. Both sides restrict cross-border trade to designated cities. From the perspective of both countries, this is also an important step to ensure the security of the common border. This principle has been in effect until the end of Roman Persian relations in the 7th century. [47]
Finally, Arcadius' "togetherness" provides a new paradigm for the search for changes in the relationship between late ancient Rome and Sassanian Persia. In ancient society, the common way to solve the contradictions and problems between countries is war. As Finley pointed out, war was everywhere in the ancient world. He agreed with Plato and called it a "merciless law". [48] But in fact, the perfect ending of Arcadius' "Solitary Care" incident created another new paradigm of seeking to change relations between ancient countries, that is, the "Solitary Care" paradigm of non war. The Persian king of Sassania, Kavadh I, also tried to let Justin I adopt his son, Khusro I. From 502 to 506 AD, Kawad I fought with Byzantium because he was refused to ask for the funds paid to the people of Queda and was asked to return Nisibis. After Justin I (reigned from 518 to 527) took the throne, the two sides again clashed over the issue of Lazika, Iberia and the Caspian Sea Pass, and the relationship became tense again. But when Kawad I, who was over seventy years old, was preparing to make arrangements for the succession of the kingdom and the throne behind him, the first thing he thought of was to let Justin I adopt his favorite son, Kusi Lao, and ease relations with Byzantium to ensure that Kusi Lao could succeed to his throne. [49] It is hard to say that this is not the imitation of the "Tuo Gu" paradigm created by Arcadius. Arcadius's "orphan" paradigm is a new attempt for the late ancient international relations.
notes:
[1] There are many versions of the transliteration of the name Istigedes I. Isdigedes is based on the Greek in Prokopius's History of War. Other common forms of transliteration in Chinese or New Persian include Yezdegerd, Yazdgard and Yazdgerd. The Chinese translation of Yisihou I is taken from the translation of Yazdgard III, the last monarch of Sassanian Persia, in the New Book of the Tang Dynasty. The Old Book of the Tang Dynasty is Yisihou. See Persia Biography under Volume II II of the New Book of the Tang Dynasty, Zhonghua Book Company, 1975 edition, page 6258-6259; Old Book of the Tang Dynasty, Volume 1988, Biography of Persia, Zhonghua Book Company, 1975 edition, pp. 5312-5313.
[2] Paul Sauerbrei, “König Jazdegerd, der Sünder, der Vormund des byzantinischen Kaisers Theodosius desKleinen，” Festschrift Albert von Bamberg Zum 1.Oktober, Gotha: Friedrich Andreas Perthes Aktiengesellchaft, 1905, pp.90－108.
[3] P．Pieler,“L'aspect politique et juridique de l'adoption de Chosroès proposée par les Perses à Justin,” Revue internationale des droits de l'antiquité，ser.3，Vol.19 (1972), pp.408－420.
[4] R.C.Blockley, East Roman Foreign Policy:Formation and Conduct from Diocletian to Anastasius, Leeds:Francis Cairns Ltd, 1992, pp.51－52.
[5] Averil Cameron, Peter Garnsey，eds., The Cambridge Ancient History (Vol.13):The Late Empire A. D.337－425, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2007, p. 128.
[6] Averil Cameron, “Agathias on the Sassanians，”Dumbarton Oaks Papers,Vol.23/24 (1969/1970), p.149; Ehsan Yarshater, ed.,The Cambridge History of Iran(Vol.3.1), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983, pp.578－579.
[7] Honorius was the Emperor of Western Rome (395-423).
[8] The Sassanian Persians.
[9] Procopius, History of the Wars, Loeb Classic Library, London: William Heinemann Ltd, 2006, 1.2.1-10. The translation here is a literal translation by the author. See also [Byzantine] Procopius, Wang Yizhu, Cui Miao transliteration: History of the Battle of Procopius (full volume II), Commercial Press, 2010 edition, page 4-5; [East Rome] Prokobi, translated by Cui Yanhong: History of War, Elephant Press, 2010 edition, page 3-4.
[10] Agathias, The Histories, trans.，By Joseph D. Frendo, Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 1975, p.129.
[11] Theophanes, Chronographia (Vol.1), CarolusdeBoor, ed., Lipsiae:Aedibvs B．G.Tevberi, 1883, pp.80－82.
[12] Cedrenus, Historiarum Compendium, I. Bekkero, ed., Bonne:Impensis Ed.Weberi, 1838, pp.586－587.
[13] Zonaras, Epitome Historiarum (Vol.3), L．Dindorfius,ed., Lipsiae:Aedibus B．G.Teubneri, 1870, p.236.
[14] Constantine Manasses, Compendium Historicum, in P. Migne, ed., Patrologia Graeca(PG)127， Paris：Imprimerie Catholique，1864, p．316.
[15] Nicephorus Callistos Xanthopoulos, Historia Ecclesiastica, in P.Migne，ed.,PG146, 1865, p.1056.
[16] Bar-Hebraeus, Chronicon Syriacum(Vol.1), P. I.Bruns, G. G.Kirsch, eds., Lipsiae:Apud Adamum Fridericum Boehmium, 1789, p.71.
[17] Geoffrey Greatrex, SamuelN．C.Lieu, eds., The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian War PartII AD363－630: A Narrative Sourcebook, London and New York: Routledge, 2005, p．31.
[18] R. C. Blockley, East Roman Foreign Policy: Formation and Conduct from Diocletian to Anastasius, p.46 Demougeot, Del'unité à la division de l'empire romain: 395－410, Paris: Adrien－Maisonneuve, 1951； Dong Xiaojia: Stilicho and the Political Situation of the Late Roman Empire - An Investigation from the Perspective of "Anti German Emotion", Historical Studies, 2018, Issue 4.
[19] Averil Cameron, Peter Garnsey, eds.,The Cambridge Ancient History (Vol.13):The Late Empire A．D.337－425, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, pp.123－124； Dong Xiaojia: Stilicho and the Political Situation of the Late Roman Empire - An Investigation from the Perspective of "Anti German Emotion", Historical Studies, 2018, Issue 4.
[20] Procopius, History of the Wars, 1.2.4－5.
[21] Evagrius, Historia Ecclesiastica, J. Bidez, L. Parmentier,eds.，London: Methuen & Co.Essex Street, 1898, p．203.
[22] Some scholars also set the date of signing the treaty as 297 or 298 AD. T. D. Barnes established the date as 299, see T D.Barnes, “Imperial Campaigns, A．D.285－311，”Phoenix, Vol.30 (1976), pp.182－186.
[23] For more detailed information on Roman Persian relations between AD 224-363, see Michael H. Dodgen, Samuel lN.C.Lieu, eds., The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian War (AD 226-363): A Documentary History, London and New York:Routledge, 2005, pp.1－3.
[24] Geoffrey Greatrex, Rome and Persia at War, 502－532, Cambridge: Francis Cairns (Publications) Ltd, p．10.
[25] Geoffrey Greatrex, Samue lN．C.Lieu,eds., The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian War Part II AD 363－630: A Narrative Sourcebook, p.16.
[26] Socrates, Historia Ecclesiastica, London: Henry G．Bohn, 1853, pp. 340－342; R. C. Blockley, East Roman Foreign Policy: Formation and Conduct from Diocletian to Anastasius,pp.48－49.
[27] Averil Cameron, Peter Garnsey, eds.,The Cambridge Ancient History (Vol.13): The Late Empire A．D. 337－425,p．123.
[28] Petrus Patricius, Fragments, 14, in C. M ü ller, ed., Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum (FHG) IV, Parisiis: Editor Ambrosio Firmin Didot, 1851, p.189. The latest English translation of the works of Peter Patricius is Thomas M. Banchich, The Lost History of Peter the Patrician: An Account of Rome's Imperial Past from the Age of Justinian, Oxon and New York: Routledge, 2015.
[29] R. C. Blockley, “The Romano -Persian Peace Treaties of A. D.299 and 363，”Florilegium, Vol.6(1984), p. 33.
[30] Ammianus Marcellinus, The History, Loeb Classical Library, London: William Heinemann Ltd, 1935, 17.5.3－8.
[31] Arzanena, Moxoena, Zabdicena, Rehimena and Corduena.
[32] Ammianus Marcellinus, The History，25.7.9－12.
[33] For the detailed comparison and influence of the Rome Persia Peace Treaty in 299 and 363, see R C. Blockley, “The Romano -Persian Peace Treaties of A. D. 299 and 363，”Florilegium, Vol.6(1984), pp.28－49.
[34] R. C. Blockley, “The Romano- Persian Peace Treaties of A. D. 299 and 363，”Florilegium, Vol.6(1984), p. 49.
[35] A branch of the Arabs, namely, the Lakhmids, which belonged to Sassanian Persia, got its name because its capital was in Sheila. At that time, there were two Arabs, and the other one belonged to the Ghassanids of the Roman Empire. For basic information about the two Arabs, see Beate Dignas, Engelbert Winter, Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity: Neighbours and Rivers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, pp.169-172. For the relationship between the late ancient Arabs and Rome and Sassanian Persia, see Greg Fisher, Between Empires: Arabs, Romans, and Sasanians in Late Antiquity, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
[36] Z．Rubin, “Diplomacy and War in the Relations between Byzantium and the Sassanidsin the Fifth Century，” in P. Freeman, D. Kennedy, eds.,The Defence of the Roman and Byzantine East(Part Ⅱ)， BAR International Series297, Oxford, 1986, p．679.
[37] For the invasion of the Huns at the end of the 4th century, see Geoffrey Greatrex for the compilation of original materials, SamuelN．C.Lieu, eds., The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian War Part II AD 363－630: A Narrative Sourcebook, pp.17－19.
[38] Rome re fortified the eastern frontier city Amida. Geoffrey Greatrex, Samue lN．C.Lieu,eds., The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian War Part II AD 363－630: A Narrative Sourcebook, p．14.
[39] See Ehsan Yarshater ed, Encyclopaedia Iranica, "YazdegerdI," http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/yazdegerd-i, April 12, 2019.
[40] It is said that Ishmael I entrusted his son Bahram V to Al Mundhir I, Prince of Saracens of Sheila, in order to ensure the succession of the throne. See Z Rubin, “Diplomacy and War in the Relations between Byzantium and the Sassanids in the Fifth Century，”in P. Freeman, D. Kennedy, eds., The Defence of the Roman and Byzantine East, BAR International Series 297，pp.689－690, n．3.
[41] Socrates, Historia Ecclesiastica, pp.340－342.
[42] Sozomenus, Historia Ecclesiastica, London: Henry G. Bohn,York Street, Covent Garden,1855, pp.411－412.
[43] J．Otto Maenchen－Helfen, The World of the Huns: Studiesin their History and Culture,Max Knight,ed., Berkeley，Los Angeles and London: University of California Press, 1973, p.74.
[44] W．A. Wigram,An Introduction to the History of the Assyrian Church or the Church of the Sassanid Persian Empire 100－640 A. D., London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1910, pp.89－90.
[45] W．A. Wigram, An Introduction to the History of the Assyrian Church or the Church of the Sassanid Persian Empire 100－640 A. D.,pp.94－96.
[46] Paulus Krueger, ed., CodexIustinianus, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014, p．188.
[47] Beate Dignas, Engelbert Winter, Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity:Neighbours and Rivals, pp.205－206.
[48] M．I. Finley, Ancient History: Evidence and Models, New York:Viking Penguin Inc., 1986, p．67.
[49] Procopius, History of the Wars, 1.11.6.11,23－30.
Akadius and his wife Eudocia have five children:
△ Flacilla， Born in 397;
△ Aelia Pulcheria was married to Flavius Marcianus/Marcian (392-457, 450-457), the emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire, in 398/399-453.
△ Arcadia, 400-444;
△ Theodosius II lived from 401 to 450 and was emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire from 408 to 450;
△ Marina, 403-449.
