must signify as many kingdoms, is evident from the seventh chapter of Daniel, where the angel, speaking of the fourth beast, says, that " the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise;" and in this view of the passage many commentators are agreed; who also admit that the ten kingdoms are to be met with "amid the broken pieces of the Roman empire." And it is evident that nothing less than the dismemberment of the Roman empire, and its division into ten independent kingdoms, can be intended by the angel's interpretation just quoted. If, therefore, the ten horns of Daniel's fourth beast point out as many kingdoms; for the very same reason must the horns of the Dragon have a similar meaning. But the Roman empire was not dismembered, and divided into several kingdoms, till a considerable time after it became Christian. what sense then can it be said, that the different kingdoms into which the Roman empire was divided by the barbarous nations are horns of the Dragon? I answer, in two senses. First, they may be considered as horns of the Dragon, because they were In gencies of the state. Part of them were plebeians, and the rest of patrician families. When they had subsisted about 70 years, not without some interruption, the office was totally abolished, and consuls again elected, one of which was chosen out of the plebeians. The triumvirate was first established B. Ç. 60, so denominated from three officers who were put in possession of the whole power of the Roman state. This power was abolished by the battle of Actium of September 2, B. C. 31, and was succeeded by the imperial, the last form of government of the Heathen Roman world. This form of government continued about 508 years. See Lempriere's Classical Dictionary. founded by great hosts of Heathen barbarous na tions, which at first threatened the utter subversion of Christianity. Secondly, they were horns of the Dragon, because it was the Roman monarchy, in its seventh Draconic form of government, which was dismembered by the barbarians. For, though the Roman empire was not divided into ten kingdoms till a considerable time after it became Christian, ît is well known that the depression of the Heathen idolatry, and the advancement of Christianity to the throne, effected not the least change in the form of government: the Romans continued still to be un's der subjection to the imperial power; and conse quently, when the Heathen barbarous nations dis vided the Roman empire among themselves, they might very properly be denominated horns of the Dragon, as it was by means of their incursions that the imperial power, FOUNDED by the Heathen Cæsars, was abolished. Bishop Newton in his Dissertation upon the seventh chapter of Daniel, gives us the enu meration of the ten kingdoms according to different authors. Mr. Mede reckons up the ten kingdoms thus in the year 456, the year after Rome was sacked by Genseric, king of the Vandals: 1. The Britons. 2. The Saxons in Britain. 3. The Franks. 4. The Bur gundians in France. 5. The Wisigoths in the south of France, and part of Spain. 6. The Sueves and Alans in Gallicia and Portugal. 7. The Vandals in Africa. 8. The Alemanes in Germany. 9. The Ostrogoths whom the Longobards succeeded in Pannonia, and afterwards in Italy. 10. The Greeks in the residue 143 UNIVERSITY of the empire. Sir Isaac Newton numbers the ΝΙΑ. thus: 1. The kingdom of the Vandals and Alans in Spain and Africa. 2. The kingdom of the Suevians in Spain. 3. The kingdom of the Visigoths. 4. The kingdom of the Alans in Gallia. 5. The kingdom of the Burgundians. 6. The kingdom of the Franks. 7. The kingdom of the Britons. 8. The kingdom of the Huns. 9. The kingdom of the Lombards. 10. The kingdom of Ravenna. Machiavel, in his history of Florence, names them as follows: 1. The Ostrogoths in Mæsia; 2. The Visigoths in Pannonia; 3. The Sueves and Alans in Gascoigne and Spain; 4. The Vandals in Africa; 5. The Franks in France; 6. The Burgundians in Burgundy; 7. The Heruli and Thuringi in Italy; 8. The Saxons and Angles in Britain; 9. The Huns in Hungary; 10. The Lombards at first upon the Danube, afterwards in Italy. Bishop Lloyd names them as follows: 1. Huns about A. D. 356. 2. Ostrogoths 377. 3. Wisigoths 378. 4. Franks 407. 5. Vandals 407. 6. Sueves and Alans 407. 7. Burgundians 407. 8. Herules and Rugians 476. 9. Saxons 476. 10. Longobards began to reign in Hungary A. D. 526, and were seated in the northern parts of Germany about the year 483. Dr. Mitchell gives us the following list of them in 455: "In the north of Gaul the Merovingian kingdom of the Franks had got possession of Batavia, and a tract of country on the right and left banks of the Lower Rhine: the Burgundians occupied the middle provinces of Gaul, from Switzerland to the ocean: the Visigoths possessed the southern provinces, from the foot of the Alps to the Bay of Biscay: the Saxons, in 455, established themselves in Britain: the Suevi and Alans, united in one kingdom, were settled in Gallicia in Spain, and the country now called Portugal: the Vandals occupied part of Spain and Africa: the Alemanni were settled in Rhætia, the north of Switzerland, and Swabia: the Boii reigned in Noricum, now called Bavaria, and Austria: the Thuringians held the western part of Mæsia: and the Ostrogoths held the strong country of Pannonia, now called Hungary." * Of these various accounts of the ten kingdoms the two first will not suit our purpose; for in Mr. Mede's scheme the kingdom of the Britons, and that of the Greeks, can in no sense be considered horns of the Dragon, because they were not separated from the empire till after the time that they became Christian. And it appears improper to unite the Ostrogoths and Longobards into one kingdom, as one was founded upon the ruin of the other. In Sir Isaac Newton's scheme, the kingdom of Ravenna cannot be called a Dra'conic horn, because it was a Greek power dependent upon the eastern empire. The principal objection I have to Dr. Mitchel's list is, that he numbers them at too early a period, even before the entire dissolution of the western empire. The lists of Machiavel and Bishop Lloyd appear to me by far the most probable, as the whole of the powers named by these authors were Heathen nations at the time when the barbarians settled in the different parts of the * See Dr. Mitchell's New Exposition of the Revelation, in loc. 7. The kingdom of the Burgundians. 8. The kingdom of the Heruli, Rugii, Scyrri, 9. The kingdom of the Saxons. It is remarkable that the Draconic horns are not said : * See Faber on the Prophecies, Vol. II. p. 270, Edit. Lond. 1810. + Rev. xiii. 1 L |