years. Had the ten horns been depicted as springing out of, and occupying the whole surface of the beast's body, we might have expected the entire empire to be included. As it is, from the very nature of the emblem, the horns grow upon the head, simply signifying the origin of ten kingdoms in the beast; not the slightest intimation being afforded, however, by this mark in the description, as to whether much or little of the beast's territory should be ruled by these superseding powers.

Let us now proceed to identify the remarkable "little horn." Our choice of dominant powers will be extremely limited; seeing that few of the original kingdoms which rose on the ruins of imperial Rome have lasted long enough to be in existence, even at the present day, much less to continue (as the little horn does) until the era of general judgments preceding the Millennium. The kingdom of the Franks at first acquired the preponderance, and for several ages sustained the character of being the most powerful in Europe; and though it has passed under various dynasties, and formed a part of other empires, it might still be said to be represented in the present kingdom of France. But the kingdom of the Franks was one of the ten; not another power "growing up among" them. Besides, if historians may have made an erroneous classification of the ten primary kingdoms, still the Franks did not conquer or succeed "three" other kingdoms, as marked in the prophecy. And certainly their country has neither taken the prominent position, nor been distinguished throughout its history by the peculiar character attributed to the little horn. It is true that Charlemagne, succeeding to the undivided sovereignty of France, A.D. 771, in a reign of forty-five years extended the bounds of his empire beyond the Danube; subdued Dacia, Dalmatia, and Istria; conquered

and subjected all the barbarous tribes to the banks of the Vistula; made himself master of a great portion of Italy, and successfully encountered the arms of the Saracens, the Huns, the Bulgarians, and the Saxons. He was consecrated by the Pope, Emperor of the West; and it seemed as though the Roman empire were about to be revived; but he left his dominions among his three sons, and the empire fell to pieces under his weak posterity. Germany again, separated from the empire of the Franks, was ruled by a long list of emperors preserving the nominal title of the Roman emperors; and some of these German potentates possessed the leading power in Europe. However, in A.D. 1806, fourteen princes of the south and west parts of Germany having united themselves into a confederation under the protection of Napoleon, this empire, the structure of

a

thousand years, ceased to exist, and Francis II., the last emperor, proclaimed the title extinct. But if Austria, France, or any other modern European state, could be considered as representing and continuing this pre-eminent power among the kingdoms (typified by Daniel's little horn), it is still true that neither in its rise and progress, nor in its specific character and conduct, has the empire of Charlemagne, and subsequently of Germany or France, fulfilled the description of the prophecy. We shall see also that the "beast" of the Apocalypse, which is a counterpart of this "little horn," has power over "all kindreds, and tongues, and nations," and that all the ten kingdoms give their power and strength to it for the term of 1260 years. Yet no political sovereignty since the fall of imperial Rome has ever regained such a universal or widely spread dominion. In fact, the image prophecy has been accurately fulfilled, that no consolidated sway should ever again unite the divided kingdoms, So that, by the

THE LITTLE HORN

very conditions of the prediction, the little horn cannot be a political government at all.

The little horn is essentially an antichristian power. It is a kingdom "diverse from the first " ten; and in action it is represented not as devouring like the previous wild beasts, or military monarchies, but as speaking "great words against the most High," and persecuting and wearing out "the saints." The expression in the original Chaldee (in which language the chapter was written) is "the saints of the high ones" (high things or places),-equivalent to "the saints of heaven;" by which the Old Testament writers generally meant the holy nation, or Jews, such being the only godly people known to them. Yet as neither the Carlovingian, the German empire, nor any other kingdom or power has directed its energies since the fall of imperial Rome to the one purpose of persecuting the Jews, it is quite plain that faithful Christianswho jointly inherit the promise of salvation made to the Hebrew race, and who have been the object of a persistent warfare like that waged by the little horn-are intended here. Now, there positively remains no other power but that of Papal Rome which at all answers to the description given, or is compatible with all the conditions of the prophecy; yet in this we do find every characteristic of the little horn fully exhibited. The Papacy is the power which has always "made war with the saints, and prevailed against them ;" has worn out the saints with wars, crusades, massacres, and martyrdom. The Papacy is the power which has always spoken "great words against the most High," and has had " look more stout than his fellows," assuming infallibility, professing to forgive sins, thundering out bulls and anathemas, excommunicating princes, absolving subjects from their allegiance, and exacting obedience

from all nations to its decrees. The Papacy is the power which has thought "to change times and laws," by imposing its pretended authority as sole and supreme vicegerent of God on earth, upon all kingdoms, and controlling the social as well as political relations of all the peoples in Christendom. The Papacy is the power which, always weak in military force (unlike the four empires and ten kingdoms which preceded it), but nevertheless able to wield a resistless dominion over potentates as well as populations by its ecclesiastical authority, has ruled the Roman world throughout the period of divided kingdoms, with a sway utterly different in kind from any that existed before; so that it is affirmed to be "diverse from" all the other kingdoms, and is symbolized, therefore, neither by a carnivorous animal, nor simply by a horn (the wild beast's weapon), but by a horn having "eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking very great things,"-typifying its intelligence and moral influence as the main source of its might. The Papacy also is the power into whose hand the saints are given until 1260 years (the "time, times, and dividing of time," as explained in a former section) have elapsed. And the Papacy is the power that will continue to utter its "great words till it perishes in the doom of the beast of which it forms a part-that is, until the kingdoms which have supported it are subverted by the pre-millennial judgments.

Popish domination has not only been the grand feature prevailing throughout the annals of history since the fall of the Roman empire, just as the little horn is the chief incident in the prophecy after the rise of the ten kingdoms; but the history of its rise is correctly prefigured in the gradual increase and subverting career attributed to the little horn. Daniel beheld three of the original ten horns "plucked up before" the little horn, or, as expressed in another

verse, they "fell before it; the explanatory verse 24th, showing that this means it should "subdue," supplant, or succeed three of the primary kingdoms already named. Now the Papacy has never been distinguished for making warlike conquests, and never subdued a nation or government by its own unassisted army; yet, as three of the ten kingdoms were successively conquered,-the first two by their immediate successors, and the last by a foreign conqueror directly on behalf of the Pope, and as the Papacy then acceded to the sovereignty of the territory so acquired, we may well regard this as a sufficient fulfilment of the prediction, without pressing the figures of the vision to too great a nicety.

Out of the ten fundamental states or nationalities, neither the Huns, Visigoths, Franks, Vandals, Burgundians, Sueves and Alans, or Saxons and Angles, gave place to the Popedom; but the Heruli, the Ostrogoths, and the Lombards, were thus conquered and dispossessed. The Heruli, under their king Odoacer, extinguished the Western empire, A.D. 476, by deposing Romulus Momyllus, who, being the last emperor in the succession of the Augusti, acquired the name of Augustulus, or Augustus the Little. After a brief dominion, they yielded up Italy, A.D. 488, to the conquering Ostrogoths, under Theodoric the Great; and Rome enjoyed a period of peaceful rule under this humane and enlightened prince and his successors. Then Belisarius, the great general of the Eastern empire, attacked the Gothic sovereign, took Rome A.D. 537, and restored Italy for a short space to its ancient imperial masters. Six years afterwards, the Goths, under the heroic Totila, recovered Italy, soon regaining possession of Rome. The victorious Belisarius again wrested Rome from Totila, who a second time recovered it; but at last, A.D. 553, the

Goths were finally subdued by Narses, another celebrated Eastern general, and Italy was re-incorporated with the empire. After thirteen years of government under a military exarch, Italy was invaded by the third tribe of invaders, the Lombards,

-the most courageous, cruel, and proudly independent of all the hordes which had issued from Northern Germany. Under Alboin they established, A.D. 568, the Lombard kingdom, comprehending Upper Italy, with a considerable part of the central and southern districts, Pavia being the capital; and a line of twenty-one kings reigned until the monarchy was finally subverted by Charlemagne, A.d. 774. so happens, however, that as the Lombards never completed the conquest of Italy, their authority was never acknowledged, either on the shores of the Adriatic, in that province of the (late) States of the Church called Romagna, or at Rome itself,

It

-as that of the Heruli and Ostrogoths had been. In what way, then, did the Papacy subdue or succeed it? The reply involves an inquiry into the time and circumstances of the rise of the Pope's temporal power; and as this will be an important point in connexion with the 1260 years, we must here be somewhat more fully historical.

The Popes became politically important in Italy from the time of Constantine's removing the seat of empire to Constantinople, A.D. 329; thus leaving them in the ancient city of Rome, the metropolis at least of the West; and afterwards, the seat of the Gothic kings being at Ravenna, tended to raise the authority of the popes in Rome. In the middle of the sixth century, the Gothic power having been overthrown in Italy, the Papacy was subject to the Eastern emperor, Justinian. At the close of that century, Rome had reached the very lowest period of its depression, owing to the fears of Lombard invasion, pestilences and famines.

The

wealth of the Church made it powerful, its temporal influence insensibly arising from the calamities of the times; so that Pope Gregory the First, or Great, encouraged the Italians to guard their cities against the iron sceptre of the exarchs. For eighteen of these representatives or proconsuls of the Greek or Eastern emperors reigned successively in Ravenna, after the overthrow of the Gothic kingdom; having civil, military, and even to some extent, ecclesiastical power,-the city of Rome, with its adjacent territory, being governed by a prefect appointed at Constantinople, but subject to the exarchs. And it was the great object of the ambitious prelates of Rome to free themselves from the dominion of the Eastern emperors without falling a prey to the kings of Italy. Pope Gregory, who died A.D. 604, had negotiated with princes upon matters of state, but himself declared that he obeyed his prince the Eastern emperor; and though his successors divided their attention between clerical and political pursuits, it was long before actual sovereignty was obtained or even attempted. Pope Martin the First, for his firm opposition to the monothelite heresy, was seized at Rome, A.D. 653, on the pretext of his being a traitor to the emperor, and banished to Cherson. So that the Popes were still "subjects" in the middle of the seventh century, although in spiritual matters they had become professedly and nominally held supreme. In the beginning of the eighth century great quarrels arose between the Eastern and Western churches, respecting the worship of images; the former opposing, the latter sanctioning this idolatry. The Emperor Leo the Isaurian, reigning at Constantinople, proscribed it in a decree of a.d. 724, and attempted its suppression by the destruction of all statues and pictures found in the churches, and by punishment of the worshippers; and Pope Gregory the

59

Second having offended Leo by opposing this edict, the emperor determined to enforce it, even in Rome itself. Whereupon Gregory appealed to all the Italian cities to continue stedfast in the Catholic faith. The populace of Ravenna rose and murdered the emperor's exarch Paul, and made great slaughter of the iconoclasts or image-breakers. The Duke of Naples shared the same fate, while the people of the city of Rome, at Gregory's instigation, expelled the emperor's duke or governor who resided there, and formally erected themselves into a republic, usurping all the rights of sovereignty, and reviving the ancient names of the senate and Roman people. This was A.D. 730. The territory of this little republic consisted of the duchy of Rome, extending north and south from Viterbo as far as Terracina, and east and west from Narni to the mouth of the Tiber. Considerable obscurity, however, hangs over the events of this period. It has been asserted that the Pope was made president of the new government, and as chief or head of the state had the general direction of all affairs both at home and abroad. On the other hand, whether or not Popes Gregory the Second and Gregory the Third may have enjoyed such a dignity, or whether the latter pontiff may be considered as having acted like a temporal prince in supporting a rebellious duke against Luitprand, king of the Lombards, it is a fact that the next Pope, Zachary, continued to date his epistles by the year of the emperor's reign; thus preserving at least a nominal subjection to the empire, while the real power of the Roman state was seized by the republic. We have the authority of Sismondi for affirming that, from this downfall of the Greek or Eastern power in Italy, to its transfer to Charlemagne, more than half a century later, Rome and its adjoining principalities were governed by republics, as independent

of the Pope as they were in the days of Romulus; and when Italy fell away from the descendants of Charlemagne, Rome and its environs were ruled by a republic again. It is perfectly clear that whatever may have been the ambitious designs of the Roman pontiffs, their claim to temporal dominion was not attempted to be set up before this date of A.D. 730.

The Eastern empire being too weak to reduce the Romans to subjection, its representative, the Exarch of Ravenna, was obliged to make peace with them. This condition of affairs led the Lombard king, A.D. 753, to seize upon the exarchate of Ravenna and the Pentapolis; and then demand the submission of the city and province of Rome, as being legitimately a dependency of the exarchate. Alarmed

at this attack, Pope Stephen the Third solicited (by actually writing in the name and person of St. Peter himself) the aid of Pepin le Bref, King of France, who was beholden to the papal influence for his newly acquired crown. Pepin accordingly, making two expeditions into Italy, compelled the Lombards not only to desist from their threats of conquest, but to deliver up the territory of which they had taken possession; and this he gave, A.D. 756, to the Pope and his successors for ever. This donation comprised the exarchate of Ravenna, Æmilia (now Romagna), and Pentapolis (now called the Marches), including the five cities of Rimini, Pesaro, Fano, Senigaglia, and Ancona. After Pepin's death, the Lombards again attempting to deprive the popes of their new dominions, Pope Adrian the First obtained the protection of Charlemagne ; who overthrew the Lombard monarchy A.D. 774, and A.D. 800 was crowned in Rome Emperor of the West,-thus consummating the separation of Rome and Italy from the Eastern empire. The duchy of Spoleto

(now Umbria) then united itself with the previous papal territory; completing the circle of what has been designated the States of the Church. Thus had three of the ten kingdoms, namely, those of the Heruli, the Östrogoths, and the Lombards, made way for the Papacy to inherit states which they had governed. But it is quite admissible for those expounders of the prophecy who apportion the ten kingdoms differently, to explain the three as including either the Exarchate or the Republic, instead of the rule of the Heruli or Ostrogoths; the question as to the date of commencement of the papal princedom remaining just the same.

Having so far identified Papal Rome with the "little horn," by the agreement of its character and the events of its early history with the terms of the prediction, we must enter more fully upon the important inquiry, whether the political sovereignty or the ecclesiastical supremacy,-or, in a word, whether the "Popedom" or the "Papacy," -is represented by the horn. Because these are distinct forms of papal power, and did not arise simultaneously; so that the date to be assigned as the beginning of the 1260 years' duration, or warfare, of the horn, depends on our determination of this point.

In the first place, (apart from the general conclusion of page 57 that no political kingdom whatever can be intended,) by following the annals of the temporal Popedom, we shall find that its character and career do not answer to the attributes and action of the little horn. Indeed, so far from the political rule of the Roman pontiffs having been a mighty engine of antichristian tyranny, or a dominant power over the other nations, it has always been restricted, fluctuating, feeble, and dependent upon the support of greater monarchies.

The donations of Pepin and Charle