The cause of the war between -Baharam and Theodosius was twofold.

1. Abdas, the Persian prelate, with unwarrantable zeal, had burned a fire temple to the ground. Baharam, who had a great respect for him, gently reproved him, and commanded him to rebuild it. This he refused to do; and at the instigation of the magi, the king put him to death, demolished the churches, and confiscated the estates of the nobles who would not recant. Numbers fled, during this persecution, for protection to Theodosius, who espoused their cause.

2. Theodosius, in the days of Isdegertes, had lent a certain number of miners to that prince, to work anew some neglected gold and silver mines in Persia. These miners he now required, and Baharam refused to send them back.

It was from these two causes that the war between the Ro

mans and Persians, at this date, arose. Fired with indignation, Theodosius took up arms, and Baharam followed the example. The contest was attended with no success of any great consequence to either. Alternate victory and defeat made up the whole sum of it; and it ended in a truce for 100 years, in which it was agreed that an end should be put to the severities exercised upon the Christians.

A noble Christian action, however, contributed, more than the peace between the two empires, to the re-establishment of Christianity in Persia. When the province of Azazene was ravaged by the Romans, in the beginning of the war, 7000 Persian prisoners were brought to the city of Amida in extreme misery. Acases, bishop of that place, having assembled his clergy, represented to them in pathetic terms the misery of these unhappy creatures. He then represented that as the Almighty preferred mercy to sacrifice, he would be better pleased with the relief of these his creatures, than by being served with gold and silver vessels in their churches. The suggestion was adopted: all the consecrated plate of gold and silver vessels were sold for the maintenance of their enemies, and they were sent home at the conclusion of the war with money to defray their expenses on the road. Baharam was so struck with this act, that he invited the bishop to his capital, where he received him with the utmost reverence, and granted the Christians many favours at his request. Thus, by heaping "coals of fire" upon the head of this high-minded prince, says Dr. Hales, did these Christian miners melt his heart to mutual compassion and kindness, verifying St. Paul's precept,

Rom. xii. 20, 21. This is the true genius of the ever blessed gospel of Christ.

After this, Baharam enjoyed peace as long as he lived; and having reigned twenty-three years, he died, beloved and honoured by his subjects, A. D. 441.

Baharam was one of the best monarchs that ever ruled Persia. During his whole reign, the happiness of his subjects was his sole object, his persecution of the Christians excepted. Ill-timed zeal on the part of Abdas led him into the crime, and overwhelmed the Christians with sorrow. A good man's zeal should be ever on the wing; but it should be united with discernment and prudence, or it will be blind and extravagant, and injure the cause it intends to advance. To be genuine, zeal must be free from a persecuting spirit. Baharam was succeeded by his son

VARANES VI., OR JEZDEGERD BEN BAHARAM.

Varanes vi., is represented as a wise and brave prince, who took the best means of ensuring the prosperity of his empire, by retaining the favourite ministers and officers of his father, while he himself carefully attended to business. Varanes was particularly strict in the administration of equal and impartial justice. He restored the ancient regulations that had fallen into disuse, and framed new laws by the advice of his council. He likewise kept up discipline in his army without severity, and never punished but with reluctance, whence he was called Siphadost, "a lover of his soldiers.".

According to the Persian historians, Varanes broke the peace, and waged war with the Romans; but this is not probable, for the Greek annals make no further mention of him than that he was contemporary with Theodosius II. and his successor Martianus.

By some Persian writers the character of Varanes is represented as unchaste, avaricious, and cruel: they style him Aitam, which has reference to violation, pillage, and massacre. This may have arisen from their displeasure at his countenancing Christianity, which, by the preaching of Manetha, bishop of Diarbekr, in Mesopotamia, and his coadjutors, made great progress in his dominions during his reign.

Varanes died A. D. 459, and he was succeeded in his kingdom by his son

PEROSES, OR FIROUZ.

Varanes had two sons, Firouz and Hormouz. His wish

was, that Hormouz, the younger, should succeed him; and for this purpose he sent away Peroses to be governor of Nimrouz, including Sigistan and Makran. Accordingly, upon his father's death, Hormouz assumed the throne, and was supported by the nobility; but Firouz engaged the Haiathelites, or White Huns, an Indo-Scythian tribe, who bordered on his provinces, to assist him in the recovery of his right, promising their king, Khoosh-Nuaz, the province of Nimrouz, as a recompense. With these auxiliaries, and some of the Persians who espoused his cause, Peroses invaded Persia, defeated his brother Hormouz, and put him to death.

In the beginning of the reign of Peroses, there was a dreadful drought of six years' continuance, which was interpreted, in that superstitious age, as a punishment from Heaven for the crime of acting contrary to the will of the virtuous Varanes. According to the Tubree, this drought was so excessive, that not even the appearance of moisture was left in the beds of the Oxus and Jaxartes.

In the seventh year, plenty was restored; and the first act of Peroses, after this national scourge, was to invade the country of the Haiathelites, his benefactors. The great object of his life, indeed, appears to have been to destroy the power of the generous monarch to whom he owed his throne. He pretended to discover, from the evidence of some Tartar exiles, that their king was a tyrant; and with the pretext of relieving his subjects from his yoke, he invaded Tartary. Khoosh-Nuaz was too weak to oppose the Persian forces, and he therefore retreated as they advanced; but he was soon enabled, by the devotion of one of his chief officers, not only to preserve his country, but to destroy his foes. This officer, after communicating the plan he had formed, entreated his prince to order the mutilation of his body, and then to cast him in the route of the Persian soldiers. This was done; and he was taken up, and carried to Peroses, who asked him who had reduced him to this sad condition. “That cruel tyrant, Khoosh-Nuaz," was the answer; and being interrogated for

*Nimrouz is part of the modern Seistan. The Persians, says Malcolm, have a tradition that this country was formerly covered with a lake, which was drained by some genii in half a day, whence the name of Nimrouz, or half-day; but as Nimrouz means also mid-day, it is probably used metaphorically in the Persian, as in French, German, and several other languages to designate the south; and this province les directly south of Bulkh, the ancient capital of Persia.

what the deed was done, he replied, "Because I took the liberty as an old and faithful servant, to represent the consequences of his bad government, and to tell him how unequal he was to meet the troops of Persia, conducted by such a hero as Peroses. But I will be revenged," he added, as he writhed with pain; "I will lead you by a short route, where you shall, in a few days, intercept the tyrant's retreat, defeat his army, and rid the world of a monster." Peroses believed the tale, and the Persian army marched according to his directions. It was not until they had been several days without water, and famine was raging among their ranks, and they saw themselves surrounded by enemies from whom they had no hopes of escape, that they discovered that they had been led to ruin, and that the conquest over them had been effected by one, who had courted death to obtain the title of "The preserver of his country.'

The greatest part of the Persian army perished in this desert, and Peroses was only permitted to return with the survivors through the clemency of Khoosh-Nuaz, to whom he sent to solicit peace, and with whom he entered into a solemn covenant never to invade his territories again.

But Peroses was tormented by the thought of the degradation he had suffered. The generosity of his enemy was also hateful, as it made his own conduct appear more base and inexcusable. Hence, no sooner was he extricated from his difficulties, than, in violation of his oath, he collected an army, delivered over his kingdom to a regent, (who, the Greeks say, was his brother,) and once more crossed the Oxus, resolved to conquer or perish.

Peroses perished. The Haiathelites having timely notice of his intention, prepared to meet him. Concealing their forces behind some mountains, they issued forth suddenly on all sides of the Persian army, and totally routed it.* Almost all the soldiers of which it was composed were either slain or taken prisoners, and Peroses himself perished, after he had worn the Persian diadem for twenty years. Such was the

* Some of the oriental writers say, that the army was taken by a stratagem. They dug, say they, a large dyke in the middle of a plain, and after having covered it over, they entrapped the Persian army into it. But this must be looked upon as romance; for to have dug a pit of sufficient dimensions for such a purpose, they must have reared up a mountain with the earth, which would have told the tale, and have made the Persians look well to their feet.

reward of ingratitude, a vice never mentioned by any heathen writer but with particular marks of detestation; among Christians it should be doubly abhorred.

The faithless Peroses was succeeded by his son

VALENS, OR BALASCH BEN FIROUZ,

who proved to be an excellent prince, tender, compassionate, and just, and desirous of lessening the misery of his country, which, at the death of Peroses, was rendered tributary to Khoosh-Nuaz. He paid the tribute for two years, and waged war with the Haiathelites two more, when, worn out with cares, he died. He was succeeded by his brother

CAVADES, OR COBAD,

who was of a martial and enterprizing disposition; ready to undertake any thing for the extension of his kingdom, and jealous to the last degree of his authority, and the glory of the Persian name.

In the tenth year of the reign of Cobad, Mazdak, an impostor, appeared in the desert, who set up for a prophet, and pretended to introduce a purer religion than had hitherto been revealed to mankind.* Cobad sanctioned the impostor and his enormities, which struck at the root of chastity and property. This produced an insurrection, in which the Persian nobles dethroned Cobad, and imprisoned him, appointing Giamasp, a person of great wisdom and integrity, king in his stead. Some time after, however, Cobad contrived to escape from prison, to the king of the Haiathelites, with whom it would appear he had made peace in the days of his perity, who assisted him with an army to recover his kingdom, which he accomplished: he deposed Giamasp, and put out his eyes.

pros

As soon as Cobad was restored to the throne, he embarked in a war with the Romans, to repay the king of the Haiathelites large sums of money which he had borrowed, and for the charges of the expedition to restore him. He marched rapidly into Armenia, raised excessive contributions from the inhabitants, and then laid siege to Armida, the principal fortress in those quarters. As the province had for many years

Mazdak attempted to revive the system of Mani, with some additions of his own, very far from tending to purity of heart.