« السابقةمتابعة »
number again. Sir Isaac Newton enumerated ten; and Bishop Lloyd and Machiavel, also enumerated ten; and Dr. Thomas enumerates ten, now existing in the bounds of the old Roman empire in Europe. But in Europe, there are now just ten great ethnological, or compound. and simple nationalities, corresponding to "people, nations, and tongues." We now give the kingdoms as enumerated by the historian Machiavel, who "is considered the best, because the most unprejudiced judge of the manner in which the Roman empire was originally divided. He very undesignedly, and (as Bishop Chandler remarks) little thinking what he was doing, reckons up the ten primary kingdoms, as follows: 1st, the Ostrogoths in Misia, 377; 2d, the Visigoths in Pannonia, 378; 3d, the Suaves and Alans in Gasgoigne and Spain, 407; 4th, the Vandals in Africa, 407; 5th, the Franks in France, 407; 6th, the Burgundians in Burgundy, 407; 7th, the Heruli and Turingi in Italy, 476; 8th, the Saxons and Angles in Britain, 476; 9th, the Huns in Hungary, 356; 10th, the Lombards upon the Danube, afterward in Italy, 483 and 526. The dates are given by Bishop Lloyd, an excellent chronologer." (Faber and Newton.)
As the ten horns were to be found in the head of the beast, of course, they were all to be in Europe; and, as we find the kingdom of the Vandals was in Africa, we must look for another kingdom in Europe, not mentioned in the above catalogue. It will be perceived, that Machiavel gives only the new kingdoms, established in the empire by foreigners. Now, during this same period. of the erection of new kingdoms in Europe, the kingdom of Rome, or that of the western empire, still existed in
Italy, and just completes the number of the ten kingdoms in Europe. The two Newtons, Mede, and Faber, all agree, and for reasons differing from each other and our own, that these ten kingdoms were to be in Europe, and all the reasons are valid. Some persons have contended for the rise of ten Gothic kingdoms in Europe; but we think it nonsense to talk so, unless all the folks in Europe are to be called Goths. The kingdoms were composed of Huns, Goths, Germans, Vandals, and Romans.
The Little Horn.-In the divided state of Rome, and among the ten kingdoms, another horn, of a different and remarkable character, was to arise. The points in its character are very important, and clearly delineated, and we shall carefully distinguish them.
1. We consider, first, the time of its rise. says, "another horn shall rise behind them." We have here adopted the rendering of the text given by Mr. Mede, and highly approved by Mr. Faber. The text says, also, "the other which came up; up among them another little horn." As the prophecy is altogether chronological, events in it which are said to be before any others, are, of course, later in time, and, those which are behind, or after such event, are anterior, or before it, in point of time, and farther back than the other events. Mr. Faber and Mr. Mede both agree, and say, that, "in reality, the little horn did not spring up posterior, in point of time, to the other horns." How much farther back the little horn arose, is not here stated, but its influence in the state seems not to have been very great at first, as it was called a "little horn,”
though afterward it became greater than all the other horns, or kingdoms, or "stouter than its fellows." It seems plainly to coincide with that power in the fourth kingdom of the image, designated as the clay, in the feet and toes, and which we have shown was called a kingdom.
2. Three of the first kingdoms were to be removed before it. The text says, "before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots;" "before whom three fell;" "he shall subdue three kings." The term, before, plainly applied to a future state in the history of the little horn, as the term "after, or behind," applied to a previous or anterior event, or to the rise of the little horn anterior to the ten. The three kingdoms that were to be plucked up were to be of the first horns. This may mean, as Newton thinks, three of the other, or first and differing class of kingdoms; or, as Mr. Faber thinks, three of the original kingdoms among the ten. They were to be totally extirpated, or plucked up by the roots.
3. The little horn was to differ in political nature from the other horns. "He shall be diverse from the first."
4. The little horn was to be a spiritual power, as well as political. "Behold in this horn were eyes, like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things." "That horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows." "He shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws, and they shall be given into his hand."
Eyes, used as a symbol, denote government and oversight. This is a customary figure to denote supervision. "The eyes of the Lord" signify his governmental oversight of the world. Isaac Newton says, "By its eyes it was a seer; and by its mouth, speaking great things, and changing times and laws, it was a prophet. A seer, Episkopos, is a bishop in the literal sense of the word; and the empire church of Europe claims the universal bishoprick." It had two eyes as a man, denoting that as a man sees but one object, through a double medium, so this horn had but one object in its mind, and attained its view through a dual organization of policy.
It was to speak great things, and great words against the Most High, and the saints were to be given into its hand. From this special oversight of the saints, and its political character diverse from the other powers, and its eyes and mouth of a prophet, directing words against God, it is evident that this horn was principally a spiritual power, though blended with the political, as is indicated by the union of the two eyes in the horn or head.
5. He was to "think to change times and laws." This is plainly expressive of a will on his part, to change political or spiritual policy, or both. The fact of the horn being a spiritual power, inclines us to the opinion that the laws and times given to it were of a spiritual nature, rather than political.
6. The "times and laws were given into its hand." This implies that it received control over times and laws, from some established authority that controlled them. It therefore appears that the little horn was really an inferior power, to the beast, or empire, a sub-controller of delegated authority, and was not possessed of original
and sovereign jurisdiction. As it arose before the other ten horns did, it must have received its power while the fourth kingdom was yet entire.
7. It was to wear out the saints." The term saints, in the Old Testament, is synonymous with Christians in the New. It is remarkable, that in all Daniel's prophecies of the latter day, he never mentions the name of Israel or Judah, or any thing about Jews after the destruction of Jerusalem. The wearing out of the saints. implies general persecuted condition; hence, the little horn was a persecuting ecclesiastical power.
8. The period or epoch of the giving of the "times and laws" into his hand is not stated in the text, and is left to be ascertained by the facts. Of course as each point in the miniature description of the prophet, embraces a large and emphatic epoch or characteristic in the realization of his prediction, the epoch of giving times and laws into the hands of the spiritual will be by no means an obscure or minute one. Those who look to small matters in detail, will never find a realization; for "no prophecy is of any private (or obscure) interpretation," or applies to obscure events.
9. The length of the era during which these laws and times were to be under control of the horn, is said to be "time, times, and the dividing of a time," or three and a half times; or just half a week of years, or of years of years, for twice three and a half make seven times or years. This is a Hebrew expression of the exact length of time the little horn was to have "dominion" over the laws, and times, and Christians.
It is also stated, that there would be two distinct. epochal periods at which the jurisdiction of the little