Geoffrey Greatrex (2005). Byzantium and the East in - Kaveh Farrokh

The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Justinian
intact. It was thus left to his successor Julian to take the offensive. Despite
Persian attempts to negotiate a peace, the new emperor assembled
a large army and advanced down the river Euphrates, following
the traditional Roman invasion route trodden earlier by the emperors
Trajan, Septimius Severus, and Carus. Like them, he reached the city
of Ctesiphon, but unlike his predecessors, he was unable to capture it.
In the ensuing retreat to Roman territory, the emperor himself and a
large proportion of his army were killed. 9
Julian’s disastrous defeat had several important consequences. The
most obvious one was the cession to the Persians of a substantial tract of
territory between the Tigris and Euphrates, including the city of Nisibis.
For this surrender both Julian and his successor, Jovian, who agreed
to the hand over, were widely criticised. 10 But a further consequence,
less frequently noticed, was the shattering of Roman illusions of conquest
in the East. Indeed, Julian was the last emperor ever to undertake
an unprovoked attack on the Persians (with the exception of Justin II,
whose ambitions were rather more limited). For the rest of the fourth
century, eastern emperors preferred to adopt a more passive eastern policy,
meeting Persian aggression when it occurred – usually in Armenia –
and trying to resolve differences by diplomacy. Gradually a more
peaceful relationship evolved, and diplomatic protocols were established,
by which each side notified the other of a change of ruler, and at least
two types of embassy (major and minor) were distinguished. By the early
fifth century the emperor Arcadius felt sufficiently confident in the good
faith of the Persian king Yazdgerd I to nominate him as the guardian of
his young son Theodosius II in order to protect him from rival claimants
to the throne. 11 An important element in the improvement of relations
between the powers was the declaration of independence by the Persian
church at a synod in 424, which removed the possibility of western
bishops interfering in its affairs: hitherto, Persian Christians had suffered
because of suspicions concerning their loyalty, whereas now they were
able to govern themselves and to develop their own doctrines, which
over time distanced them further from their western coreligionists. 12
For the rest of the fifth century, relations between the two sides remained
peaceful, punctuated by two brief wars in 421–422 and 440.
The war that broke out in 502 lasted somewhat longer but proved
equally inconclusive and was effectively brought to an end by a truce
in 506. It was not until twenty years later that hostilities recommenced;
however, because no peace had intervened since 506, the war of
502–532 is generally treated as one conflict, despite the long interval. 13
480
Cambridge Companions Online © Cambridge University Press, 2006