So far was the Bishop of Rome from becoming a head of the empire, by the secession of Constantine from the ancient capital, that he still continued a mere subject of his sovereign, as much a subject in short as any other bishop: we may therefore safely pronounce, that, during at least a century after the Constantinian age, the period assigned by Mr. Brightman for the continuance of the short-lived seventh head, no new head whatsoever arose. And again: so far was this supposed seventh head from being slain by the Gothic sword, and from reviving afterwards in the capacity of the eighth head, that the incursions of the northern barbarians, as Machiavel most justly observes, contributed more than any circumstance whatsoever to advance the power of the Papacy. They did not slay it; but they nourished it, and gradually gave it strength and consistency*. Thus it appears, that Mr. Brightman's scheme is wholly unsupported by history..

Mr. 'Mann, on the other hand, conceives, that the Pope became the seventh head when he was constituted supreme head of the Church†; and that

* See the citations from Machiavel in the 4th chapter of this Work. See likewise the citation from Sir Isaac Newton.

+ Mr. Mann fixes this event to the age of Justinian; whereas it did not really and permanently take place till the year 606 in the reign of Phocas. His scheme however is improved, instead of being injured, by this remark; because it shortens the interval between the rise of his supposed seventh and eighth heads, thereby making it more consonant with the prophecy.

he

he afterwards became the eighth head, when he induced the Italians to revolt from the Emperor Leo on the score of image-worship*--This scheme however is as little tenable as any of the foregoing ones. The seventh head was to continue but a short space: the ecclesiastical supremacy of the Pope has continued down to the present hour. The seventh head of a secular beast must be a secular power: the ecclesiastical supremacy of the Pope is a purely spiritual power; nor is it possible to conceive how he could become a head of the state or the secular beast by being constituted head of the Church. The eighth head must likewise be a secular power, and one moreover so large that at its first rise it must be (as we are taught by the prophet) commensurate in a manner with the whole beast; the temporal authority of the Pope never extended beyond his own dominions; nor is it easy to imagine, how the sovereign of an Italian principality can be the last secular head of the beast, when his temporal supremacy over the empire was at no time ever acknowledged t. But, if the Pa

pacy

* Mann's MS. cited by Bp. Newton Dissert. on Rev. xvii.

Let the reader attentively reperuse the preceding citations from Gibbon relative to the inauguration of the Carlovin gian empire, and let him then declare whether in the presence of Charlemagne the Pope bears any resemblance to a head of the secular Roman beast. At that period, who was the sovereign of Rome and Italy; who, the master of the Western empire? Charlemagne or the Pope? Yet so far will a love of system carry some writers, that Mr. Fleming actually speaks

of

1

pacy be not the double head of the beast in its twofold spiritual and secular capacity, it will be found impossible to point out any other manner in which there is even an appearance of probability that it might be that head. For, supposing the Pope to be intended by the double or septimo-octave head of the beast, where are we to draw the line of distinction between his two characters? At what period did he cease to be the seventh head, and begin to be the eighth head? Or in what sense can he be said to have "continued a short space" as the seventh head? History will furnish us with no answer to these questions.

As for the other grounds on which the Pope cannot be esteemed the last head of the beast, namely because his claim of temporal supremacy was never

allowed,

of the Pope becoming at this period the real king of Rome, and represents the Roman Emperorship of Charlemagne as being a mere empty title (Apoc. Key, p. 35.). The very reverse of this is what we learn from history. Charlemagne was the real sovereign of the western empire: and the Pope held the dukedom of Rome under him as a mere feudal vassal. "That Charlemagne, " in effect, preserved entire his supreme authority over the city of Rome and its adjacent territory, gave law to the "citizens by judges of his own appointment, punished male"factors, enjoyed the prerogatives and exercised all the

functions of royalty, has been demonstrated by several of "the learned in the most ample and satisfactory manner, by the most unexceptionable and authentic testimonies. To be convinced of this, it will be sufficient to consult Muratori's Droits de l'Empire sur l'Etat ecclesiastique. Cap. vi. p. 77.” Mosheim's Ecclesiast. Hist. vol. ii. p, 237,

allowed, they have already been stated so fully at the beginning of the present chapter, that it is superfluous here to recapitulate them.

5. It remains only, that we enquire how far the Carlovingian empire answers to the prophetic cha racter of the double head of the beast.

The subversion of the kingdom of Lombardy in the year 774 made Charlemagne, already king of France, the undisputed master of Italy under the title of Patrician of Rome. In this capacity, he granted to the Pope the fiefs of a certain part of Lombardy and of the whole state of Rome, confirming at the same time the former grant made by his father Pipin. Here then, in the regular chronological order of prophecy, after the beast had been wounded to death under his sixth head, and after his deadly wound had been healed, we behold the rise of the Carlovingian Patriciate, or the seventh independent temporal head of the beast. This head however, when it came, was to continue only a short space; for it was almost immediately to be absorbed in the eighth head, which (the Apostle informs us) is in reality one of the seven although styled the eighth, and which (I have shewn) can only be identified with the seventh head: consequently we are led to expect, that the two heads are to be so intimately blended with each other, as to form jointly only one septimo-octave head. Accordingly we find, that, just 26 years after its rise, the seventh head was for ever lost in

the eighth head. In the year 774*, the Carlovingian government of Italy commenced: in the year 800, Charlemagne assumed the imperial dignity, which has ever since been borne by a prince within the limits of the old Roman empire, and which has ever since given him precedence over the ten horns by constituting him in a manner their head†. Here

then

* I date the rise of the Patrician head at the era of the conquest of Lombardy, because the mere titular Patriciate of Charles Martel and Pipin then first became a real form of government. Should the reader however be disposed rather to date its rise at the time when the title was conferred upon Charles Martel, the prophecy respecting the shortness of its duration will be no less accomplished. In that case, it will have continued about 50 years instead of 26; either of which periods may justly be termed a short time. As for the Patriciate of the Exarchs, it resembled in name alone the Patriciate of Charlemagne. They bore the title of Patrician as dependent viceroys: he bore it as an independent prince, while the reign of the Greek Emperors was suspended, and during what Mr. Gibbon styles "the "vacancy of the Empire."

+ From the days of Charlemagne, the Emperor has always claimed, and has always been allowed, precedence over every one of the ten horns: and as such he has invariably been considered as the head of the great European commonwealth. This point however is best decided by a professed writer upon Heraldry. In his chapter upon the precedency of kings and commonwealths, Sir George Mackenzie has the following observations. "Amongst those who are supreme, kings have the "preference from commonwealths; and, amongst kings, the

Emperor is allowed the first place by the famous ceremonial "of Rome, as succeeding to the Roman Emperors-And there"fore the German and Italian lawyers, who are subject to the Empire, have with much flattery asserted, that the Emperor "is the Vicar of God in temporals" (manifestly in contradis tinction