them, yet as Sir Isaac Newton and Bishop Newton justly observe and have ably shewn. "By tracing the particulars it appears, that though some of them may agree very well with Antiochus Epiphanes, yet others can by no means be reconciled to him: but they all agree and correspond exactly with the Romans, and with no one else; so that the application of the character to them must be the right application." Observations on Daniel, chap. 9. p. 123. and Proph. Vol. II. p. 52-80. And I have endeavoured to prove still more fully, in the preceding communications, that this "little horn" denoted the Roman power, in its nascent or republican form; and "the king of fierce countenance," in its imperial: See Vol. IV. p. 142, 143. N. B. Juvenis confounds this little horn, with another, denoting the papal power. Dan. 7, 8.

Josephus was probably led into this unfortunate error, which has misled so many learned critics and commentators since, by observing that the author of the history of the Maccabees, applied (perhaps by way of accommodation) to the profanation of the temple by Antiochus, 1 Mac. 1, 54, that remarkable expression of Daniel 9, 27; and 12, 11, the "abomination of desolation," which OUR LORD afterwards appropriated to the Romans, Matt. 24, 15. as shewn, ibid. p. 145.

There is no number in the Bible, whose genuineness is better ascertained than that of the 2300 days; it is found in all the printed Hebrew editions; in all the manuscript copies extant, of Kennicott and De Rossi's collations; and in all the ancient Versions, Fathers and Commentators, excepting the Vatican copy of the Septuagint, which reads 2400, followed by Symmachus; and some copies, noticed by Jerom, 2200; both evidently, literal errors, in excess and defect, of no avail: But to make it square with his hypothesis, Josephus most unwarrantably

wrests 2300, into 1296 days, somewhat exceeding "three years and six months" in round numbers, during which he represents the city as being in the possession of Antiochus, from the time of its capture to his expulsion by Judas Maccabeus; but which Scripture shews to have been really about five years, compare 1 Mac. 1, 20, with 4, 36-52; while he states the actual profanation of the sanctuary from the time of offering sacrifices on the idol altar to its purification, as lasting three years precisely, according to Scripture, 1 Mac. 1, 59. and 4, 52. This obvious distinction, resulting from a comparison of the annexed passages of Josephus *, has been overlooked by Wintle in his confused and ill-digested note, which contributed to mislead Juvenis; blending truth and falsehood together without sufficient discrimination, as will appear from the following analysis:

*Josephus, in his first work, the Jewish War, stated the desolation as lasting three years and half in the gross: reckoning from the capture of Jerusalem:

xx

Αντιοχῶ ὁ κληθεις Επιφανης έλων κατα κρατο. Ιεροσολυμα, και τασχων ετεσι τρισιν και μησιν ἐξ, ὑπο των Ασαμωναίς παίδων εκβαλλεται της χώρας.

"Antiochus called Epiphanes, having taken Jerusalem by storm, and kept possession of it for three years and six months; was expelled from the country by the sons of Asamoneus." Proem. Bell. Jud. § 7. p. 956. This passage explains the following, which probably misled Wintle, by partial citation :

Την τε πολιν αίρει κατα κρατΘ, και πολυ το πληθς των Πτολεμαίω προσεχονίων ανείλε, ταις τε άρπαγαις ανέδην επαφεις τες τρατιώτας, αυτος και τον ναον εσύλησε, και τον εντελεχισμον των καθ ̓ ἡμεραν εναγιασμών επαυσεν επ' ετη τρια και μηνας έξ.

"He took the city by storm, and slew a great number of Ptolemy's adherents, and gave up the city to promiscuous pillage by the soldiers, and plundered the sanctuary himself, and stopped the celebration of the daily sacrifices; for three years and six months." Bell. Jud. I, 1, 1. p. 958.

See Hudson's judicious note (g) p. 958.

1. To amend the faulty hypothesis of Josephus, but not venturing to alter the text, Mede conjectures, that the 2300 days, (amounting to six years and somewhat more than a quarter) are to be reckoned from the beginning of the transgression which occasioned this desolation, 1 Mac. 1, 11, &c. and not from the height thereof, when "the daily sacrifice was taken away," 1 Mac. 1, 54, &c. See his works, p. 659.But from the beginning of the transgression," in those days," when Antiochus began to reign, "in the 137th year of the kingdom of the Greeks,” or æra of the Seleucida, chap. 1, 10, to the cleansing of the sanctuary, in the 148th year, chap. 4, 52, was a longer period, of ten or eleven years.

2. Relinquishing this untenable solution, Cappellus dates the commencement of the 2300 days, from the profanation of the Temple by Antiochus," the 15th day of Casleu," or November 17, in the year of Rome 586, (chap. 1, 54.) to the defeat and death of Nicanor, by Judas Maccabeus, on the 13th of Adar, or March 6, in the year 593; (1 Mac. 7, 43.) which comprehends, he says, the whole space precisely. But it is incorrect; for Petavius, differing from Usher, places the death of Nicanor, a year earlier, in U. C. 592; and 2, it recedes totally from Josephus.

3. Finding the utter impracticability of reconciling the Scripture number of 2300 evenings and mornings, supposing them to signify wyga, or full calendar days, according to general acceptation, and the usage of holy writ; Gen. 1. and Matt. 12, 40. &c. Camerarius, followed by Dathe, &c. curtailed the whole period to its half; fancifully supposing that the evenings and mornings, denoted the morning and evening temple sacrifices of each day, during the course of 1150 days; amounting to three Julian years, and fifty-five days; of which, three

years

years and ten days elapsed from the setting up of the abomination, &c. to the cleansing of the sanctuary; and the remaining forty-five days, he supposes, intervened from the publication of the king's " Letter," or edict, chap. 1. 44. to its execution, chap. 1. 54. But this is uncertain, and unsupported by Scripture.

4. The failure of all the foregoing solutions, led Archbishop Secker to the rash expedient of rejecting, like Josephus, the original number, and reducing it (with the faulty interlineary version of Montanus) to 1300; supposing, that the irrefragably established reading 'bs, 2000, was a corruption of the singular, 1000. "Now 1300," says he, "will be between the two numbers of Daniel, chap. 12, viz. 1290, and 1335,”—a fanciful analogy; "and this [number 1300] at 360 days [to the year], will be three years, seven months, and ten days, not very far distant from the three years and half of Josephus:"--but not critically corresponding thereto, any more than the 1296 of Josephus; and this, likewise, we may, with more reason, suppose, was a corruption of the second period, 1290; which Josephus meant to substitute as nearer to his hypothesis.

5. Despairing of any solution of the difficulty, Michaelis agrees with Geierus, "that perhaps we cannot count these [2300] days, nor those in Daniel [chap. 12.] exactly; but in the time of Antiochus, they could; when it was most needful."-This random guess Wintle strangely deems" an ingenious conjecture!" and gravely represents, that "Th. Vulg. and Ar. have the word "days," which tends to strengthen it."-Although, to all appearance, utterly irrelevant thereto!

6. And now, Juvenis himself relinquishing the literal acceptation of the 2500 days, understands them figuratively for years" with many-commentators, and with

great

great reason, according to the usage of this prophet himself,” as Wintle most justly remarks: but he unskilfully applies them to "the various Anti-christian powers which were to counterfeit or oppose the church of God;" and of which, retaining the leaven of Josephus's error, he, with many uncritical commentators, supposes " Antiochus to be a type," although Daniel's period most obviously relates to the long-continued desolations of the Jewish church, not the Christian: while, to enlarge his field of conjecture, he rather inconsistently adopts the exploded curtailment of Camerarius; and further reduces the whole and half periods (retaining both) from Chaldean to Julian years!

7. To begin then with his half period :-" If we date," says he, "the 1134 years from the death of Christ, [A.D. 31, Petavius, or A.D. 33, Usher] when the Jewish sacrifices were [virtually] abolished, the period will reach to Waldo," [in A.D. 1165, or A.D. 1167.]

But both these terminations are incorrect:for Thuanus, that accurate historian, states that "Peter Waldo, a wealthy citizen of Lyons, gave name, about the year of Christ 1170, to the Valdenses;" who, before that time, called themselves Vallenses, or inhabitants of "the valleys" of Piedmont. They were also called Albigensis, or Albigeois, from Alby, a city in the southern part of France, where they abounded. See Bp. Newton, Proph. vol. iii. p. 169-176. And, besides its incorrecness, surely this was the commencement nearly (not the termination) of the sufferings and persecutions of these earliest reformers, by the Papal Antichrist; those "faithful witnesses" indeed, of the Law and of the Gospel, whose confession of faith, about A.D. 1200, published in Latin by Sands. Hist. Eccl. p. 425, and translated, in the Irish Pursuits