they could neither save themselves in case of rout, nor fall upon a flying foe.  Least of all could they participate in a decisive struggle in the open, but they always seemed to be stealing something which belonged to the men who were engaged in the struggle.  And apart from this they were so indifferent in their practice of archery that they drew the bowstring only to the breast[5], so that the missile sent forth was naturally impotent and harmless to those whom it hit[6].  Such, it is evident, was the archery of the past.  But the bowmen of the present time go into battle wearing corselets and fitted out with greaves which extend up to the knee.  From the right side hang their arrows, from the other the sword.  And there are some who have a spear also attached to them and, at the shoulders, a sort of small shield without a grip, such as to cover the region of the face and neck.  They are expert horsemen, and are able without difficulty to direct their bows to either side while riding at full speed, and to shoot an opponent whether in pursuit or in flight.  They draw the bowstring along by the forehead about opposite the right ear, thereby charging the arrow with such an impetus as to kill whoever stands in the way, shield and corselet alike having no power to check its force.  Still there are those who take into consideration none of these things, who reverence and worship the ancient times, and give no credit to modern improvements.  But no such consideration will prevent the conclusion that most great and notable deeds have been performed in these wars.  And the history of them will begin at some distance back, telling of the fortunes in war of the Romans and the Medes, their reverses and their successes.

II

[408 A.D.] When the Roman Emperor Arcadius was at the point of death in Byzantium, having a malechild, Theodosius, who was still unweaned, he felt grave fears not only for him but for the government as well, not knowing how he should provide wisely for both.  For he perceived that, if he provided a partner in government for Theodosius, he would in fact be destroying his own son by bringing forward against him a foe clothed in the regal power; while if he set him alone over the empire, many would try to mount the throne, taking advantage, as they might be expected to do, of the helplessness of the child.  These men would rise against the government, and, after destroying Theodosius, would make themselves tyrants without difficulty, since the boy had no kinsman in Byzantium to be his guardian.  For Arcadius had no hope that the boy’s uncle, Honorius, would succour him, inasmuch as the situation in Italy was already troublesome.  And he was equally disturbed by the attitude of the Medes, fearing lest these barbarians should trample down the youthful emperor and do the Romans irreparable harm.  When Arcadius was confronted with this difficult situation, though he had not shewn himself sagacious in other