sion of his existing head by the sword of literal war, which is his political death: for in each case, according to the definition, he plainly ceases to be what he previously was.

Now this ambiguity is unavoidable; because, as I have just observed, it is inherent in the very nature of the definition.

VII. When I formerly discussed the question of the wild beast's predicted death, I was led to understand it in a moral sense:. and, on this principle, I expounded it to mean the conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity, by which change the wild beast ceased to be a wild beast or (in prophetic language) experienced a moral death; while analogically I supposed his revival to denote his relapsing into his old idolatry and demonolatry concealed from immediate detection by the disguise of a new appellation, in consequence of which return to his ancient ferine habits he again became a wild beast or (in prophetic language) experienced a moral resurrection *.

In this exposition there was nothing abstractedly erroneous; and it seemed to correspond very accurately with the recorded fortunes of the Roman wild beast: for he undoubtedly lost his bestial nature, and therefore ceased to be a wild beast or experienced a moral death, when he became a convert to Christianity; while, on the other hand, he resumed his ancient bestial nature, and therefore appeared again

as a wild beast or experienced a moral resurrection, when he openly apostatised from sincere Christianity to the idolatrous worship of images and canonized dead inen. Hence there was nothing abstractedly erroneous in the exposition: and the only true question was, whether it accorded as well with the context of the passage or passages which foretell the death of the wild beast, as it did with a particular portion of his recorded history.

This point I did not sufficiently consider: but, supposing that St. John had declined expressiy to determine the specific head which was to be mortally wounded by the sword, I conceived myself at liberty to pitch upon the sixth head as the head in question. And to such a selection, which appeared so exactly to quadrate with the moral history of the sixth head, I was the rather led; because I could not but perceive, from the very terms of the prophecy, that the mortally wounded head must necessarily be either the sixth or the seventh. For in the days of St. Jolin, when the prediction was delivered, five heads had fallen; and the circumstance, shadowed out by the mortal wounding of some one of the heads, was still future. Hence it plainly followed, that, as the mortally wounded head could not possibly be any one of the five already fallen heads, it must be either the sirth or the seventh bead.

In thus determining the mortally wounded head to be EITHER the sixth or the seventh, I judged perfectly right but then, as I have just intimated,

from

from a supposition that the prophet had left the. matter wholly undecided as to WHICH of those two heads was the head in question, I inquired no further, but deemed myself fully warranted in ascribing the deadly wound to the sixth. Here however I was mistaken, as (I believe) all my predecessors had been before me. St. John indeed does not, in any express asseveration, pronounce WHICH of the heads should be wounded to death: but yet, with a truly divine art and with an astonishing degree of verbal accuracy, while he purposely conceals this mystery from the hasty observer, he reveals it to the patient labour of comparative investigation.

1. We have seen, that the events, which, in scenical representation, appear symbolically as the death and revival of the wild beast, are described in verbal though somewhat enigmatical phraseology, as the cessation and renewal of his existence

Now, though it is not expressly declared, WHICH head should be wounded to death, when the apostle exhibits the hieroglyphic in mere pictured or scenical representation † yet, when the interpreting angel afterwards gives a copious exposition of the picturehistory, he informs us with sufficient plainness, that the Empire, symbolized by the wild beast, should cease to exist in consequence of the downfall of the SEVENTH king or the SEVENTH form of government,

*The beast, that was, and IS NOT, and yet is ;” or, as some copies read, yet SHALL BE." Rev. xvii. 8.

† Rev. xiii. 1-14.

VOL. III.

D

and

and that it should evist again in consequence of the rise of an EIGHTH king or an EIGHTH form of government which eighth however should only be a reappearance or a revival of some one of the former

seven.

"The beast, that thou sawest, WAS, and is NOT, "and SHALL ASCEND out of the abyss, and shall

go into perdition: and they, that dwell on the "earth, shall wonder, whose names are not written "in the book of life from the foundation of the "world; when they behold the beast, that was, " and is NOT, and yet is. And here is the mind, " which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven

mountains, on which the woman sitteth: they are "also seven kings. Five are fallen, and one (now) "is, and the other is not yet come; and, when he "cometh, HE MUST CONTINUE A SHORT SPACE. "And the beast, that was and IS NOT, even he is "the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition *.'

Let us attentively observe the minute characteristic marks of the eighth form of Roman govern

ment.

It is to be the wild beast, that WAS, and IS NOT, and yet (after his temporary cessation of existence) again is under an eighth form of government which shall be a repetition of one of the preceding seven. This description, however eniginatical it may be in other respects, plainly intimates, that the new

* Rev. xvii. 8-11.

term

term of the wild beast's existence should commence with the rise of the eighth form of government: for then it was AGAIN TO BE, after once HAVING BEEN, and after having next CEASED TO BE. But, if the wild beast's new term of existence commences with the rise of the eighth form of government: then the term of his non-existence must immediately have preceded the rise of that eighth form. The wild beast however certainly continued to exist until the extinction of the seventh form of government; just as, in the economy of nature, the fabulous hydra was supposed to enjoy uninterrupted life so long as one head succeeded immediately to the lopping of another. Consequently, the term of his first existence, which the prophet denotes by the phrase the beast that WAS, must have lasted from the rise of the first head to the extinction of the seventh head, or (as the angel explains the hieroglyphic) from the rise of the first form of Roman government to the extinction of the seventh form. But we have already seen, from the express words of the prophecy, that the term of his second existence, which St. John denotes by the phrase the beast that is or (as some copies read) the beast that SHALL BE or the beast that SHALL ASCEND, commences with the rise of the eighth form of government. Hence it will clearly and inevitably follow, that the term of his non-existence, which the apostle denotes by the phrase the beast that is NOT, must be that indefinite period of time, which elapses between the extinction of the seventh form and the rise of the eighth form; because the