one of the most remarkable of the Roman Emperors of the East, reigned from A.D. 610 to 641. He was first brought into notice by the success of his attempt against the Emperor Phocas, whose throne he usurped. After assuming the purple, he began to display that extraordinary energy of character which marked the first years of his reign. He restored discipline to the army, renewed Herald. the treaties with foreign powers, and prepared for war against the Avars, who had devastated Thrace, and were marching on Constantinople, when they suddenly saw fit to retire to their homes beyond the Danube. The next foe he had to meet was Persia, whose illustrious general, Sarbar, after taking Jerusalem, had fought his way into Africa, had taken Alexandria, and by devastating the African granaries of the empire, had reduced Constantinople almost to starvation. Another Persian army laid waste Asia Minor; and the King Chosroes (Khosru), emboldened by victory, called on Heraclius to renounce Christianity and worship the sun. During all this time the Roman Emperor was quietly but vigorously organizing his defence, and when all was ready he crossed over into Asia with his legions, defeated the enemy in every encounter in a five years' war (622-627), and penetrating into the very heart of the Persian Empire, seized and pillaged the royal palaces, from which he carried off spoils of untold value. He returned to his capital in triumph, and received the congratulations of every potentate from the Indus to the Atlantic, on having for ever crushed the hereditary foe of his race. Better still, he received the blessings of his own subjects, whom he had endeared by his victory, and by splendid exhibitions of personal valour in nearly every battle which he fought. But another power had in the meantime struggled painfully into existence in the East, which Heraclius would have done well to anticipate. Mohammed and his Arabians having conquered every foe that opposed them, found themselves at length confronted by the Roman Empire of the East. A pretext for war between powers contending for the sovereignty of the world was not long wanting, and Heraclius, whom disease and weakness prevented from heading the Roman legions in person, saw the fruits of his long and bloody wars with Persia wrested one by one from his grasp. The contrast between his declining and his opening years became now fatally apparent. Sunk in a slothful sensuality, which he alternated with the excitement of religious controversy, he allowed his empire to fall to pieces before his eyes, and helped on that process of decay which some centuries later offered the Roman Empire of the East an easy prey to the crescent of the False Prophet. Heraclius died in 641, and was succeeded by his eldest son Heraclius, who reigned under the title of Constantine III.

The character of Heraclius is a curious riddle which it is not very easy to solve. His Persian campaigns are admitted by modern strategists to rank him among the greatest soldiers of antiquity. His personal valour was not surpassed by that of any hireling soldier of his day; while his talents as a diplomatist, so long as he chose to exert them, bade fair to re-establish the Roman Empire on its ancient footing of glory and security. In marvellous contrast to these great qualities stands the vicious imbecility of his later years, arising partly from physical causes, and partly from moral defects. A parallel to his character, in some respects a very striking one, is to be found in our own Edward IV. Both were in a sense usurpers; both unexpectedly displayed great military talents and the most extraordinary personal courage; both gained great victories against great odds; and both debased great faculties by the most miserable vices. The parallel holds good even to the destiny of their respective families.