pass through Babylon, he made all possible haste in his journey. In the mean time he had a fall from his chariot, which injured him; and soon after, being seized with a mortal sickness in his bowels, (probably the cholera), he died at Tabae, in the mountainous country, near the confines of Babylonia and Persia. Report stated, even in ancient times, that Antiochus was greatly distressed on his death-bed by the sacrileges which he had committed.

Thus perished the most bitter and bloody enemy which ever rose up against the Jewish nation and their worship. By following the series of events it is easy to see, that his death took place some time in February of the year 164, B. C. Assuming that the terminus a quo of the 1335 days is the same as that of the 1290 days, (as already remarked above), it is plain that they terminate at the same period, when the death of Antiochus is said to have taken place. "It was long before the commencement of the Spring," says Froelich in his excellent work before quoted, "that Antiochus passed the Euphrates and made his attack upon Elymais" (p. 52); so that no more probable time can be fixed upon for his death, than at the expiration of the 1335 days, i. e. some time in February of 164 B. C. No wonder that the angel pronounced those of the pious and believing Jews to be blessed, who lived to see such a day of deliverance. The great enemy of their nation and their God had fallen; Judas Maccabaeus had become every where victorious; the sanctuary was now cleansed of its pollution, pure worship was restored, and the Hebrews had every prospect of independence and of happiness. In fact, their own kings reigned over them for a long time after this; so that the death of Antiochus was a most important means of securing both civil and religious liberty.

How perfectly natural such an explanation is, and how consonant with the spirit of the Hebrews, on like occa

sions, any one may see who will consult Isaiah and John. When the king of Babylon, the great enemy of the Jews, falls, "the whole earth breaks forth into singing, the fir trees and the cedars of Lebanon exult over him," Is. 14: 7, 8. When spiritual Babylon, i. e. persecuting Rome, falls, John calls upon "heaven and holy apostles and prophets to rejoice over her, because God has avenged them on her," Rev. 19: 20. Can it be any matter of wonder then, that Daniel congratulates those who should survive Antiochus Epiphanes, and calls them blessed, i. e. happy, when they shall have lived to see the day in which liberty and peace, civil and religious, are once more secure from the assaults of such an unrelenting tyrant?

One, and only one, more period in the book of Daniel claims our present attention. This is in chap. viii. 14. In the vision seen by Daniel, as there related, one angel inquires of another, 'How long the sanctuary and the host are given to be trodden under foot.' The answer is: "To two thousand three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed."

The time here designated has been matter of controversy; and consequently the subject needs some remarks.

The words in our version: Unto two thousand and three hundred days are, in the original Hebrew, expressed in this manner: "Unto evening-morning two thousand three hundred." The doubt has fallen upon, eveningmorning; for some have understood it as meaning the evening and morning 7, i. e. the constant sacrifice offered, morning and evening, in such a way that each of these is to be separately included in the number 2300; so that, in fact, only 1150 days are in reality designated. What increases the difficulty of deciding is, that exactly such a phraseology no where else occurs in the holy Scrip

tures.

Yet there are cases which bear some analogy to

this, in the Hebrew; there is a very close analogy also to this mode of expression in the Greek; and the nature of the events described in the context may help us, moreover, to form some proper opinion in respect to the meaning of the peculiar phrase before us.

Nothing is more common in Hebrew, than the repetition of the same word, either in order to denote intensity of number, power, quality, etc.; or else to denote distribution. As specimens of the first kind, the reader may consult Gen. 14: 10. Ex. 8: 14. 2 K. 3: 16. Joel 3: 14; of the second, Gen. 32: 16. Num. 17: 2. Ezek. 24: 6. Gen. 7: 9. But these usages do not bear directly on our present difficulty; for presents us with two different words; which moreover are without any conjunction between them. On this latter circumstance stress has been laid by some critics, who aver that distribution is meant to be designated by the form of expression (without conjunction), so that in reality only half the number of days, 1150, is meant. But on the circumstance that the Vav conjunction is omitted, it would seem that stress of this kind cannot well be laid. In cases where the repetition of the same noun denotes the conjunct idea of all, each, every, e. g. each year or every year, sometimes the Vav is omitted, and sometimes it is inserted; for examples of omission, see Deut. 14: 12. 2 K. 17: 29. Ps. 69: 5. Num. 9: 10; yet Vav is inserted in Ezra 10: 4. Ps. 87: 5. Esth. 3: 4. Deut. 32: 7, and many other cases, without any seeming difference of sense. any thing is to be argued from the omission of the copula, it would seem to be, that the two words thus brought together, are to be considered as a kind of compound word. So Gesenius, Lehrgeb. p. 519. Indeed it would be quite natural, in case the writer did design that the two words should be separately considered, so that each of them

If

should be reckoned as a constituent part of the 2300, to put a Vav between them. Thus where absolute severalty is intended between nouns repeated, the copula Vav is always inserted; e. g. Deut. 25: 13. Ps. 12: 3. 1 Chron. 12: 38. So where the two words and come together, and each is designed to be separately considered or counted, the copula is put between; e. g. in 1 Chron. 16: 40. 2 Chron. 2: 3. 31: 3. Ezra 3: 3. Jerome says, that, in the case before us, "vespere et mane successionem diei noctisque significat," i. e. evening and morning signifies the succession of day and night. Indeed the whole seems plain when referred to Gen. 1., where the evening and the morning constitute one day, Gen. 1: 5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31. That the writer had the usage in his mind which these last cited passages develope, seems plain from the order in which he has placed the words, viz. by making evening to precede morning, because it began the day among the Hebrews. And in the same manner the Greeks put the two parts of the day together, in their vuz9usga (see 2 Cor. 11: 25), in order fully and emphatically to designate one complete day. That this is the simple object of the expression now under examination, I cannot well doubt. The principal support of those who regard the 2300 as designating the offerings of the morning and the evening, and so as marking only 1150 whole days, is derived from the supposition that is necessarily implied before the expression. Yet in v. 26 such an addition is neither made, nor admissible before these words. On the whole, then, we must consider these 2300 evening-mornings as an expression of simple time reckoned in the Hebrew manner. So Gesenius, Rosenmueller, Hävernick,

and others.

The termination or terminus ad quem of these is given in the closing phrase: Then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

The original Hebrew here, wp, might afford room for some doubt as to the true meaning. The word wyj, rendered sanctuary, has no article, (we should naturally expect one if it has this meaning); and the verb : appropriately means to justify. But this verb also means to put right, to restore, viz. that which is in a defective or wrong state; and so it may not unnaturally be employed here to designate the restoration of the temple or sanctuary to its proper state or condition. This was done by Judas Maccabaeus, as we have seen above, on the 25th of Dec. 165 B. C. Counting back from this, as the terminus ad quem of the 2300 days, we come to Aug. 5th of the year 171 B. C. What are the events of this year, then, which correspond to that which is said to be done from and after the commencement of the period in question?

In vs. 9-12 of the context, we are informed of what was to be done. "The little horn," i. e. Antiochus Epiphanes, "waxed great, and magnified itself,” i. e. extended itself, to the host of heaven, and cast down to the ground some of the host, even of the stars, and trampled upon them. Even to the prince of the host did it magnify itself, and by it was the daily sacrifice removed, and the dwelling place of the sanctuary was cast down." Here, it will be perceived, the aggressions of Antiochus commence with his attack upon the priests of the temple, called the host of heaven, but specifically upon the high priest, who is called the prince of the host. These are the leading facts which characterize the doings of Antiochus, from and after the beginning of the 2300 days. The profanation of the temple and the taking away of the daily sacrifice follow on, very naturally, in the sequel. Does history present us with any thing that happened in the year 171 B. C., which corresponds with the representation in Daniel?

Menelaus had, by his artifices and by bribery, obtained