ng of the Alemanni, fixed their
camp on the confines of Armenia. But they were strictly enjoined not to
commit the first hostilities, which might be understood as a breach of
the treaty: and such was the implicit obedience of the Roman general,
that they retreated, with exemplary patience, under a shower of Persian
arrows till they had clearly acquired a just title to an honorable and
legitimate victory. Yet these appearances of war insensibly subsided in
a vain and tedious negotiation. The contending parties supported their
claims by mutual reproaches of perfidy and ambition; and it should seem,
that the original treaty was expressed in very obscure terms, since they
were reduced to the necessity of making their inconclusive appeal to the
partial testimony of the generals of the two nations, who had assisted
at the negotiations. [136] The invasion of the Goths and Huns which
soon afterwards shook the foundations of the Roman empire, exposed
the provinces of Asia to the arms of Sapor. But the declining age,
and perhaps the infirmities, of the monarch suggested new maxims of
tranquillity and moderation. His death, which happened in the full
maturity of a reign of seventy years, changed in a moment the court and
councils of Persia; and their attention was most probably engaged by
domestic troubles, and the distant efforts of a Carmanian war. [137] The
remembrance of ancient injuries was lost in the enjoyment of peace.
The kingdoms of Armenia and Iberia were permitted, by the mutual,though
tacit consent of both empires, to resume their doubtful neutrality. In
the first years of the reign of Theodosius, a Persian embassy arrived
at Constantinople, to excuse the unjustifiable measures of the former
reign; and to offer, as the tribute of friendship, or even of respect, a
splendid present of gems, of silk, and of Indian elephants. [138]

[Footnote 133: The evidence of Ammianus is original and decisive,
(xxvii. 12.) Moses of Chorene, (l. iii. c. 17, p. 249, and c. 34,
p. 269,) and Procopius, (de Bell. Persico, l. i. c. 5, p. 17, edit.
Louvre,) have been consulted: but those historians who confound distinct
facts, repeat the same events, and introduce strange stories, must be
used with diffidence and caution. Note: The statement of Ammianus
is more brief and succinct, but harmonizes with the more complicated
history developed by M. St. Martin from the Armenian writers, and from
Procopius, who wrote, as he states from Armenian aut