Our sceptical historian remarks, with more apparent sincerity than usual, that this act was calculated "to inform, the Persian king of the true spirit of the religion which he persecuted," and that the name of the doer might well "have dignified the saintly calendar." These remarks are just; and it is certainly to be regretted that, among the many unknown or doubtful names of canonized Christians to which the Church has given her sanction, there is no mention made of Acacius of Amida.
Varahran was perhaps the more disposed to conclude his war with Rome from the troubled condition of his own portion of Armenia, which imperatively required his attention.

Since the withdrawal from that region of his brother Sapor in A.D.418 or 419, the country had had no king.

It had fallen into a state of complete anarchy and wretchedness; no taxes were collected; the roads were not safe; the strong robbed and oppressed the weak at their pleasure.

Isaac, the Armenian patriarch, and the other bishops, had quitted their sees and taken refuge in Roman Armenia, where they were received favorably by the prefect of the East, Anatolius, who no doubt hoped by their aid to win over to his master the Persian division of the country.

Varahran's attack on Theodosiopolis had been a counter movement, and had been designed to make the Romans tremble for their own possessions, and throw them back on the defensive.
But the attack had failed; and on its failure the complete loss of Armenia probably seemed imminent.