fering radically and essentially from every one of the previous six forms, represented by the six first heads of the beast.

By way of recapitulation of what has been said, I will venture to assert, that no power has ever arisen within the limits of the Roman empire which at all answers to the prophetic character of the septimo-octave head, except the Carlovingian monarchy alone. Three things concur in this character: the last head of the beast was to be at once both the seventh and the eighth head, the seventh continuing only a short time, and then being swallowed up in the eighth; it was at its first rise to be the whole beast; and it was to be the beast that was, and is not, and yet is, that is to say, it was to be the revived beast or the beast while in his papally-idolatrous state.

1. Now the Carlovingian monarchy was the septimo-octave head, as being the Patriciate merging into the feudal Emperorship.

2. It was the whole beast, as comprehending the whole Western empire either by actual sovereignty, or by the homage of acknowledged superiority.

3. And it was the beast that was, and is not, and yet is, as comprehending that whole empire, after

it

sided at Constantinople. The only difference was this; that Charlemagne granted Rome to the Pope to be held as a fief of the empire, under himself the superior lord, agreeably to the usages of feudalism. Indeed the whole behaviour of Charlemagne shews plainly, that he was as much the real sovereign of Rome as Buonapartè is at present. June 1, 1806.

it had relapsed into the abominations of papal tyranny and idolatry.

Neither the Papacy, nor any other power, except the Carlovingian Patricio-Imperial, government, will be found to answer to this prophetic description; whence I doubt not, but that that government is intended by the last head of the beast.

Mr. Mede and Bp. Newton think, that St. John beheld all the ten horns growing together upon the last head. To this opinion however there appear to be insuperable objections, whether the last head be the Papacy or the Gothic Emperorship. The springing up of horns out of a head necessarily implies, that the head was in existence before the horns: whereas both the Papal Empire (as contradistinguished from the primitive Bishopric of Rome), and the Carlovingian Emperorship, arose after the horns had sprung up; namely, the one in the year 606, and the other in the years 774 and 800*. Hence it is plain, that the ten horns could not have appeared to the prophet as growing upon the last head. To which then of the heads are we to assign the ten horns? Most assuredly to the sixth. In the days of St. John five were fallen: and, between the fall of those five and the rise of the last, the ten horns sprung up. It is manifest therefore, that they can only have sprung up out

Bp. Newton dates the commencement of the 1260 years considerably later than the year 606. According to this plan, it is still more impossible, that the ten horns should appear to St. John growing upon the last head, if that last head be the Papacy. VOL. II.

S

of

of the sixth. Such accordingly we find to be.the case. The Roman Empire was divided into ten kingdoms under the sixth head of the beast, previous to his revival under the same sixth head*, and previous to the rise of his last head. It was the sixth head therefore that branched out into ten horns: consequently to the sixth head the ten horns must necessarily belong.

III. In the remaining part of the prophecy respecting the ten-horned beast we are informed, agreeably to the preceding prophecy respecting the war between the dragon and the woman, that it was the dragon which gave his power and his seat or secular authority to the beast; and that the beast, as his agent, should persecute the saints 42 months or 1260 years. Hence it appears, that the persecution of the dragon and the persecution of the beast is one and the same; and that they are both exactly commensurate with the reign of the little horn. The dragon therefore, as I have already observed, we must consider as the main spring of the whole Apostasy, the ten-horned beast, as his secular engine of persecution; and the two-horned beast, as the spiritual instrument which he used to stir up the last head and the ten horns of the beast of the sea against the mystic woman. In this sense then it is, that the whole ten-hornea beast, after he had arisen from the sea,

"I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; " and his deadly wound was healed the beast, which had "the wound by a sword, and did live." Rev. xiii. 3, 14. ❝ opened

17

opened his mouth in blasphemy to God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and "them that dwell in heaven." He blasphemed the name of God by sanctioning all the blasphemous absurdities of his little horn*, that predicted man of sin, who proudly sat in the temple of God, and literally shewed himself that he is God by receiving the adoration of his cardinalst: hence it is said by Daniel, that the beast should be destroyed "because of the voice of the great words which "the horn spake." And he blasphemed the mystic tabernacle of God, and them that dwell in the symbolical heaven, by upholding and propagating the most foul and injurious calumnies against the witnesses, accusing them of all the crimes which pagan Rome had formerly laid to the charge of the primitive Christians.

*

We

Any acts of idolatrous worship," says Mr. Lowman, " may well be expressed by blaspheming God and his name, as "they deny to the true God his distinguishing honour, and give it to creatures, whether images, saints, or angels." Paraph. in loc.

"

+ See Pp. Newton's Dissert. on the man of sin.

Mrs. Bowdler ingeniously supposes, that the blasphemy here spoken of means apostasy, for which she cites Acts xxvi. 11. Taking the word in this sense, the beast, while pagan, laboured to cause the primitive Christians to blaspheme or apostatise; by requiring them to abjure their faith: and, when afterwards in an apostatical state himself (2 Thess. ii. 3. Tim. iv. 1.). he was equally zealous in causing the witnesses to blaspheme, not indeed the literal name of Christ, but certainly his religion so far as the spirit of it is concerned, by

We are moreover informed, that all the world worshipped the dragon and the beast, and wondered after the beast. Respecting this worship we are afterwards taught, that it was the second beast who caused it to be paid to the first; and much light is thrown upon its nature by a phrase which more than once occurs in the Apocalypse: men are said to worship the beast and his image. Now it is superfluous to observe, that the Papists never literally worshipped the devil; and equally so to remark, that they never literally worshipped the ten-horned beast, or the secular Roman empire: yet this worship is immediately connected with the worship of an image which the second beast caused to be made to, or for the use of, the first beast. Hence I apprehend, that the worship of the dragon and the beast means the devotion of the whole Roman world to the apostate principles of the beast, such as his idolatrous worship of images, his opposition to the truth, and his persecution of the witnesses. They that dwelt upon the earth worshipped the dragon, by lending themselves as tools to advance the infernal domination of the prince of darkness*; and they worshipped the beast by adopting

apostatising to Popery. Mrs. Bowdler however, who wrote in the year 1775, supposes, that a time may come when the ancient pagan blasphemy of the beast will be revived, and when men will be required to abjure the very name of Christ. Her conjecture has certainly been accomplished in at least one of the principal members of the beast. Practical Observ. on the Rev. p. 35-46.

* "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your "father ye will do.” John viii. 44.