28 Ancient Interpretation, [LECT. that became renowned was that of the Assyrians, and the second that of the Medes and Persians together, and after these, that of the Macedonians was the third, so the fourth kingdom now is that of the Romans 3." With reference to the several Fathers who bear witness to this interpretation, I shall only remark -what is interesting to trace, and at the same time strongly confirms its correctness and truth,that we find them recognizing, in the successive periods in which they severally wrote, the actual fulfilment of the prophetic description; as exhibited first in the strength, and then in the growing weakness of the empire under which they were themselves living. Thus Irenæus, in the second century, speaks of the division of the empire which then reigned, as a thing still future 1. And so likewise Hippolytus, at the beginning of the third century, in reference to the fourth beast, with its teeth of iron and its nails of brass, says; "Who, then, are these but the Romans? which same is the iron,”-i. e. in the vision before us, of the image," the kingdom which now standeth. For its legs, saith he, are of iron. After this, then, what remaineth, beloved, save the toes of the feet of the image, wherein part shall be of iron and part of clay, being mixed one Ρωμαίων οἱ ἐκκλησιαστικοί 4 "Manifestiùs adhuc etiam de novissimo tempore, et de his qui sunt in eo decem regibus, in quos dividetur quod nunc regnat imperium, significavit Joannes Domini discipulus in Apocalypsi.. Et diligenter Daniel finem quarti regni digitos ait pedum esse ejus imaginis, quæ à Nabuchodonosor visa est, &c. . . . Ergo decem digiti pedum, hi sunt decem reges in quibus dividetur regnum." Iren. contra Hær. lib. v. cap. 26. 1. Op. pp. 323, 324, ed. Massuet. II.] traced progressively. 29 with another 5?" And again-" the legs of iron, the beast dreadful and terrible, are the Romans which now have dominion; the toes of the feet, iron and clay, the ten horns which are about to be"." This was written during the early years of the third century. But towards the end of the fourth, or at the beginning of the fifth century, we find St. Jerome, in his comment on the passage before us, speaking thus; "But the fourth kingdom, which clearly pertains to the Romans, is the iron which breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things. But its feet and toes are partly of iron, and partly of clay; which at this time is most manifestly proved. For as, in the beginning, nothing was stronger and harder than the Roman empire, so in the end of things nothing is weaker; when, both in civil wars and against divers nations, we need the help of other, barbarous tribes"." And the historian Sulpicius Severus, at the beginning of the fifth century, considered the predicted times of weakness and division in the empire to be now come; when "the Roman state was, as he tells us, "administered now, not by one emperor, but by many, and they 5 Τίνες οὗτοι ἀλλ ̓ ἢ Ῥω μαῖοι; ὅπερ ἐστὶν ὁ σίδηρος, ἡ νῦν ἑστῶτα βασιλεία αἱ κνῆμαι γὰρ αὐτῆς σιδηραῖ. Μετὰ γὰρ τοῦτο τί παρείλειπται, ἀγαπητέ, ἀλλ ̓ ἢ τὰ ἴχνη τῶν ποδῶν τῆς εἰκόνος, ἐν οἷς μέρος μέντοι ἐστὶ σιδηροῦν, μέρος δέ τι ὀστράκινον, ἀναμεμιγμένον εἰς äλλnλa;-De Antichristo,c.25. Op. p. 14. (ed. Fabric. Hamburg. 1716.) 6 Κνῆμαι σιδηραῖ, θηρίον ἔκθαμβον καὶ φοβερὸν, Ῥωμαῖοι οἱ νῦν κρατοῦντες. Ibid. p. 15. " "Regnum autem quartum, quod perspicue pertinet ad Romanos, ferrum est quod comminuit et domat omnia: sed pedes ejus et digiti ex parte ferrei, et ex parte sunt fictiles, quod hoc tempore manifestissimè comprobatur. Sicut enim in principio nihil Romano imperio fortius et durius fuit, ita in fine rerum nihil imbecillius: quando et in bellis civilibus, et adversùm diversas nationes, aliarum gentium barbararum indigemus auxilio."-Hieron. Op. tom. iii. p. 1081. (ed. Bened.) 30 Ancient Interpretation. [LECT. always, in arms or in policy, at variance among themselves." He goes on to say, "it is notorious that the Roman soil is occupied by foreign nations, either in rebellion, or always surrendering that which is committed to them, under the plea of peace: and we see barbarian tribes intermingled with our armies, cities, and provinces; and Jews, in particular, dwelling amongst us, and yet not adopting our manners." It must be admitted, I think, to add greatly to the force of the consentient judgment of these early writers, strong as it is in itself, that the empire in which they recognized the fulfilment of the Prophecy, was one under which they were actually living; and which thus to successive generations, in its gradual decline, identified itself continually more and more closely with the terms of the prophetic description. We must here, however, consider another passage of St. Jerome, from which it would seem to have been inferred that he was among the first pro 8 9 "Siquidem jam non ab uno imperatore, sed etiam à pluribus, semperque inter se armis aut studiis dissentientibus, res Romana administratur... Siquidem Romanum solum ab exteris gentibus aut rebellibus occupatum, aut dedentibus semper pacis specie traditum constat; exercitibusque nostris, urbibus atque provinciis permixtas barbaras nationes,et præcipue Judæos,inter nos degere nec tamen in mores nostros transire videamus.". Sacr. Hist. lib. ii. p. 67. (ed. Elzev. 1656.) See Note, Appendix, 9 Todd's Donnellan Lec tures, First Series ("Discourses on the Prophecies relating to Antichrist in the writings of Daniel and St. Paul," Dublin, 1840), p. 50, note. I am not quite sure that I have understood rightly the force of Dr. Todd's remark. He says: "St. Jerome supposed the division of the kingdom to have been begun in his own times, and he appears, from what he says in another place (Præf. ad lib. xi. in Isaiam), to have been among the first propounders of this opinion." The opinion, of course, could not have been propounded earlier, if the events on which that opinion was II.] St. Jerome. 31 pounders of the opinion in question. St. Jerome, doubtless, was among the first who had pointed out the weakness that, in his days, was discovering itself in that mighty empire which had claimed for itself the title of "Eternal;" and which, it might well be feared, would, in its pride, ill brook the notion of an approaching fall. His words are, "If, in the exposition of the image and its feet, and the division of the toes, I have interpreted the iron and clay of the Roman kingdom, which Scripture portends shall be first strong, then weak, let them not impute it to me, but to the prophet. For neither must we so flatter princes as that the truth of the Holy Scriptures be neglected, nor is a general disputation an injury to any individual'." We know that, in the early ages of the Church, under the dominion of a hostile power, it was felt to be the part of Christian prudence and duty not to give needless occasion to heathen jealousy, ever ready to awake against a religion which seemed to be-what it really was, as described in the vision before us,-"a kingdom;" though "not" indeed "of this world," nor one which, with weapons such as the heathen wielded, would endanger Cæsar's throne. But though, when the signs of internal weakness were making themselves manifest, St. Jerome formed, had indeed now only begun to take place. Dr. Todd does not mean that St. Jerome first taught that the Roman empire should be thus divided; for Irenæus, whom he had quoted just before in the same note, had taught the same. 1 "Quòd si in expositione statuæ pedumque ejus, et digitorum discrepantia, ferrum et testam super Romano regno thought it but due to the interpretatus sum, quod primum forte, dein imbecillum Scriptura portendit, non mihi imputent, sed Prophetæ. Neque enim sic adulandum est principibus, ut Sanctarum Scripturarum veritas negligatur, nec generalis disputatio unius personæ injuria est."-Præf. in lib. xi. in Isaiam, Op. tom. iii. p. 285. (ed. Bened.) 2 John xviii. 36. 32 Chrysostom and Augustine. [LECT. truth of Scripture Prophecy to declare it openly, he was introducing no new opinion; he was but tracing the growing fulfilment of a prophetic vision which had by common consent been applied to the empire of Rome, and which was clearly seen to foretel the division of that empire, in the last stage of its existence, into ten kingdoms. Among the contemporaries of St. Jerome, St. Chrysostom, who may be taken as representing the general sense of the Greek Church, gives the same exposition of the four kingdoms, or rather, takes it for granted'; and speaks, in particular, of the Roman empire as being in his time in some respects weak, in others stronger. And St. Augustine, of the African Church, refers to Jerome's interpretation as a satisfactory vindication of those who had expounded the four kingdoms to be the Assyrian, the Persian, the Macedonian, and the Roman. "How fitly they have done this," says St. Augustine, "those who are desirous of knowing may read the presbyter Jerome's book upon Daniel, very carefully and learnedly written"." Theodoret 4 See Note, Appendix. Presuming the reference to the four kingdoms to be unquestioned, St. Chrysostom simply asks, Τίνος δ ̓ ἕνεκεν τὴν αὐτοῦ βασιλείαν καλεῖ χρυσῆν, τὴν δὲ τῶν Περσῶν ἀργυρᾶν, καὶ τὴν τῶν Μακεδόνων χαλκήν, καὶ τὴν τῶν Ῥωμαίων σιδηρᾶν καὶ ὀστρακίνην ; ὅρα καταλλήλους τὰς ὕλας. 5 Ἡ δὲ Ῥωμαίων χρησιμωτέρα τε καὶ ἰσχυροτέρα, ὕστερα μὲν τοῖς χρόνοις, διὸ καὶ ποδῶν τάξιν ἐπέχει. ἔστι δὲ αὐτῆς τα μèv åσ¤evñ, τà dè ioxvpórɛpa TOLOTTO TÒ ȧλλÓKOTOV TV аμθρώπων. He goes on to show how, from the abounding of ini quity, and love growing cold, enmities, and jealousies, and divisions arose, and thus the component parts of the body politic did not cleave one to another, as iron is not mixed with clay."-Op. t. vi. p. 214. "Quatuor illa regna exposuerunt quidam Assyriorum, Persarum, Macedonum, et Rom manorum. Quàm verò convenienter id fecerint, qui nosse desiderant, legant presbyteri Hieronymi librum in Danielem, satis diligenter eruditéque conscriptum."-S. August. de Civ. Dei, lib. xx. c. 23. Op. tom. vii. p. 605. (ed. Bened.) |