On the division of Armenia between Arsaces and Chosroes, a really good understanding had been established, which had lasted for about six years.  Arsaces had died two years after he became a Roman feudatory; and, at his death, Rome had absorbed his territories into her empire, and placed the new province under the government of a count.  No objection to the arrangement had been made by Persia, and the whole of Armenia had remained for four years tranquil and without disturbance.  But, about A.D. 390, Chosroes became dissatisfied with his position, and entered into relations with Rome which greatly displeased the Armenian monarch.  Chosroes obtained from Theodosius his own appointment to the Armenian countship, and thus succeeded in uniting both Roman and Persian Armenia under his government.  Elated with this success, he proceeded further to venture on administrative acts which trenched, according to Persian views, on the rights of the lord paramount.  Finally, when Varahran addressed to him a remonstrance, he replied in insulting terms, and, renouncing his authority, placed the whole Armenian kingdom under the suzerainty and protection of Rome.  War between the two great powers must now have seemed imminent, and could indeed only have been avoided by great moderation and self-restraint on the one side or the other.  Under these circumstances it was Rome that drew back.  Theodosius declined to receive the submission which Chosroes tendered, and refused to lift a finger in his defence.  The unfortunate prince was forced to give himself up to Varahan, who consigned him to the Castle of Oblivion, and placed his brother, Varabran-Sapor, upon the Armenian throne.  These events seem to have fallen into the year A.D. 391, the third year of Varahran, who may well have felt proud of them, and have thought that they formed a triumph over Rome which deserved to be commemorated.

The character of Varahran IV. is represented variously by the native authorities.  According to some of them, his temper was mild, and his conduct irreproachable.  Others say that he was a hard man, and so neglected the duties of his station that he would not even read the petitions or complaints which were addressed to him.  It would seem that there must have been some ground for these latter representations, since it is generally agreed that the cause of his death was a revolt of his troops, who surrounded him and shot at him with arrows.  One shaft, better directed than the rest, struck him in a vital part, and he fell and instantly expired.  Thus perished, in A.D. 399, the third son of the Great Sapor, after a reign of eleven years.

CHAPTER XIII.

Accession of Isdigerd I. Peaceful Character of his Reign.  His Alleged Guardianship of Theodosius II.  His leaning towards Christianity, and consequent Unpopularity with his Subjects.  His Change of view and Persecution of the Christians.  His relations with Armenia.  II.  Coins.  His Personal Character.  His Death.