press his notion of that course, as far as regarded the destinies of the Roman empire, between his own time and the end: but no one, I apprehend, will be prepared to maintain that his notion must be the

true.

As concerns the Twelve wings, however, the case may be widely different, if their history is, in fact, the history of the Roman empire, not after, but before, and up to, the time of the author of the vision. There may be facts in the history of that empire, up to the time of the author, which may answer to this description; and so indeed there are, if his time was about the end of the first century. For, as the body of the eagle denotes the Roman empire, so that its Twelve wings denote as many kings, who reigned over that empire, is plainly asserted, if not in the vision", yet in the interpretation of it: and that these kings are the first twelve emperors of Rome, though Dr. Laurence is of a different opinion, appears to me very clear, principally on the following

accounts:

First, xi. 9—11 of the vision, compared with xii. 20-22 of the interpretation, plainly describes the civil commotions in the body of the Roman empire, before the establishment of the first of its emperors as such commotions, by which the fabric of its power was in great danger of perishing altogether; yet out of which, notwithstanding, the empire of its kings as such, arose and was confirmed.

Secondly, xi. 16-18 of the vision, compared with xii. 18 of the interpretation, gives the clearest possible intimation of the long reign of the second of u Ch. xi. 7−10: 13–15: 20–25. x Ch. xii. 16—18.

the Roman emperors, Augustus; of which this characteristic circumstance is there mentioned, that none of his successors should reign even half so long. Tiberius had the longest reign of the first twelve Cæsars, next to Augustus; yet Tiberius reigned only twenty-two years complete, whereas Augustus was currently reckoned to have reigned fifty-six years complete.

Thirdly, xi. 23, 24 of the vision, after mentioning the perishing of all the wings in their turn, when their allotted period of existence was over, it is said of them generally: "Some of them indeed "set themselves up, but did not reign:" which, I think, is a plain intimation that some of the twelve should aspire indeed at the purple, but should not gain or not retain it. Such were three of the first twelve Cæsars, Galba, Otho, and Vitellius; all of whom reigned successively, and perished between June 9, U. C. 821, and December 21, U. C. 822.

Besides these reasons, it seems to me absurd to suppose that the eagle in the vision, can be the same with the fourth beast in Daniel, and yet not denote the Roman empire, as such, just like that; or to suppose that the twelve kings can answer to twelve wings, who reigned by turns and in succession, as they are said to have done, and yet not be twelve successive emperors as such. Add to which, that the crimes of this eagle or empire, as laid to its charge, xi. 44-48, are what the empire as such alone could have been guilty of: and among these we find a specific reference in verse 47, to " its de"struction of the strong hold of the righteous, and removing the walls of them who had not injured

66

66

it;" which, if we consider that this writer means

by the righteous, the believing part of the Jewish community alone, must be understood of the treatment of Judæa by the Romans; most probably in the war of Nero and Vespasian.

So much for the explanation of the Twelve wings; which we may justly contend to be simply and purely historical. But as to the Eleven heads; we may observe first, that they are made up of Three and Eight; the Three, originally a part of the eagle, as much as the wings; the Eight, subsequently sprouting out from the Twelve wings, and being in fact both heads and small wings.

Secondly, that the Three heads, when they first appear, are represented as silent"; and they continue in that state of silence, until the Twelve wings have each reigned and perished; which clearly implies, that the Three heads of the eagle, whatever they were, should not come into the discharge of their proper part, until the Twelve wings had done with theirs; nor, in fact, until later.

For, thirdly, the Eight heads, or smaller wings, are also supposed to have nothing to do, until the Twelve wings have perished. After that, both they, and the Three silent heads, come into a state of activity, as follows. First, Two out of the Eight perish, immediately after the Twelve: then Two of the Six remaining, pass over from the rest to the Three heads: then, out of the Four left, first one conspires to reign and quickly perishes; then a second, who meets with the same fate; then the Two last of the Four; at which moment of their a Ch. xi. 5, 6.

y Ch. xi. 1. b Ch. xi. 25.

z Ch. xi. 3, 4. 12.

conspiring to reign, the middle head of the Three silent heads awakes; and with the aid of his Two associated smaller heads or wings, said to have passed over to the Three heads sometime before, destroys the Two last of the Four; after which, he reigns himself. Then the Two other silent heads reign; one of which, that on the right, devours the other, that on the left. Afterwards, he perishes also himself; and then, last of all, the Two wings (or smaller heads,) which had been the associates of the Middle head before, reign in like manner, and perish d.

We have the interpretation of all this, xii. 23— 35; whence it appears that the course of the representation is strictly consecutive; the history of the Eight small wings, and the Three silent heads, beginning directly after the destruction of the last of the Twelve great wings, and going on to the very time of the end; the Eight being generally described as so many kings, whose years should be impious, and their days short; all, near upon the end, but the four nearer to it than the first two; and the last two nearer to it than the four-and reserved in fact for the very end; while the Three heads between them and the Four, should bring on by their intervention after their several orders, and by the peculiar nature of their reign, "the conclusion of the king"dom (that is, of the Roman empire) itself."

It would be in vain to endeavour to extract from this representation, though perfectly clear and determinate in itself, a consistent historical sense, applicable to the next eleven Roman emperors after

с

Chap. xi. 25-39.

d Chap. xii. 2-4.

the reign of the twelfth; though there are some things in the account of the middle head, and of the other two, which are strikingly adapted to the history of Severus, and his two sons, Antoninus and Geta, who both succeeded him; especially, his dying in his bed, but in torment; and the right head's devouring the left, yet perishing himself by the sword". Severus actually so died; and Geta was actually murdered by Antoninus; and Antoninus by Macrinus. But no part of this vision of the heads is historical, as referred to the time of the author. It merely gives his conception of events, in the short period, as he thought it, to come between his own time and that of the end. His history of the Three silent heads in particular, seems to be nothing more than his idea of the kingdom of Antichrist.

We

The age of the Pseudo-Esdras is therefore, we may presume, just between the demise of the twelfth Roman emperor, Domitian, and the accession of the thirteenth, Nerva; that is, A. D. 96. exeunte. assumed above that he was writing about that time; and as the Revelation had been seen and published to the Christian world, before the end of the reign of Domitian, it was possible for him to have seen, and become acquainted with it, before he wrote his own work; as we also supposed he had done.

The two first chapters of the Second of Esdras, which are found in the Vulgate, are wanting in the Ethiopic; and are considered by Dr. Laurence to be no part of the genuine work. Certainly their author differed from the Pseudo-Esdras, in not expecting a

e

Chap. xii. 34. chap. xi. 38, 39.

f Chap. xii. 29-31.