THE EASTERN QUESTION IN THE TIME OF THE END.
It is impossible that the Holy Land can be for ever subject to the Gentiles—It is to be wrested from them in the course of “the time of the end”—Of Daniel’s 2,400 days—Of the beginning of “the time of the end”—Of the king of the south at that time—The Autocrat of Russia the king of the north at “the time of the end”—England and the Jews—Of Gogue and Magogue—Ezekiel’s and John’s two different and remote confederacies—Daniel’s king of the north of “the time of the end”, and Gogue of “the latter days”, the same—The Gogue of Ezekiel proved to be Emperor of Germany and Autocrat of all the Russias—Gomer and the French—Sheba, Dedan, the Merchants of Tarshish and its young lions, identified as the British power.
Our paraphrase was discontinued (page 403), at the end of the thirty-fifth verse of the eleventh chapter of Daniel. It left Antiochus Epiphanes, the king of the north, at war with the Jews under Judas Maccabaeus, who were fighting against fearful odds for their very existence as a nation.
The prophecy about the Little Horn king led our attention off from events in the land of Israel to others in Italy and Constantinople where we beheld the Little Greek Horn, and after him, the Little Latin Horn, doing honour to the Roman Bishop, and converting him into a god in their respective dominions. But, though the testimony directed our attention to Rome, in order that we might be able by the transactions of which that city was the centre, to identify the power represented by “the king who did according to his will”, before it dismisses the Little Horn by pressing it down into the Assyrian Horn of the Goat, our thoughts are again turned upon Israel and their interesting country, by the prophet telling us that the Little Greek Horn “shall divide the land for gain”. This treatment of the Holy Land is particularly characteristic of the Ottoman power which possessed the country from 1509, when it was incorporated with the Turkish empire by Selim IX. It has been divided by his successors to their Pashas literally “for gain”: by which the ruin of the country was made sure and expeditious. Having purchased principalities in it at enormous prices, they make a conscience of reimbursing themselves in the shortest possible time by every kind of extortion; well-knowing, in past times at least, that if a higher price were offered than they had given, their heads would soon appear at Constantinople, in attestation of their dangerous posts being occupied by equally unscrupulous exactors.
But is the Holy Land to continue for ever as it is at this day? Is the Little Horn of the Goat always to divide it for a price among his pashas? These are questions of great interest to all who believe the gospel of the kingdom of God and his Christ. If the reader has accompanied me through this volume, he will, I doubt not, be ready to answer in full assurance of faith and hope, with an emphatic “No, it is impossible”. Yea, verily, it is impossible that it can always be desolate and subject to the horns of the Gentiles. If it were, the kingdom of God could never be established; for the Holy Land is the territory of the kingdom. To all, then, who believe “the things of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ”, how intensely interesting must the future destiny of this country be! Well may it be said by the prophet, “Ye that make mention of the Lord, keep not silence, and give him no rest till he establish, and till he make Jerusalem a praise in the earth.”
But when and how shall the land of Israel be wrested from the Little Horn of the Goat? As to the when, the prophecy contained in the last six verses of the eleventh chapter plainly informs us, that it shall be in the Time of the End; “for at the time of the end shall be the vision”. This period is also termed, “the last end of the indignation; for at the time appointed the end shall be”. In others words, the winding up of the vision shall be at the expiration of a given time. The next question is, What given time is this, and when does it expire? In reply to this, I remark that the only time given in connection with the vision of the Ram and He-goat, and the prophecy connected with it, is a long interval of 2,300 years from the evening to the morning of the vision-period. The Septuagint reads 2,400; and the Hebrew may not be better authority than the Greek translation here, and that says 2,300 as in the common version. Assuming, then, 2,400 is correct, the question is still before us, When does this period expire? A similar inquiry is made in the text, namely, “How long the vision?” “At”, or till “the time of the end shall be the vision.” Then the 2,400 years are to reach no further than the time of the end, the duration of that end not being defined by the time of the vision.… To repeat the question, “How long the vision (concerning the taking away of) the daily, and the treading down by that which maketh desolate, to give both the holy (land) and the host (of Israel) to be trodden under foot?” To this question it was replied, “Unto 2,400 days; then shall the holy (land) be cleansed”. We are not to understand by this, that the Holy Land would be cleansed in the 2,401st year; but that the 2,400 years being expired, the subsequent event to be brought about would be the cleansing of the land of Israel. This is a work that requires time, and cannot possibly be accomplished till after the battle of Armageddon.
I say that “the cleansing of the sanctuary” is the cleansing of the land of Israel; and I cannot conceive how any other interpretation can be put upon it, in the face of Ezekiel’s testimony, short of this. He predicts the fighting of a great battle in the land of Israel “in the latter days”, which is synonymous with “the time of the end”. He describes it as taking place between the Lord God and a great northern power, which is signally defeated upon the mountains of Israel. The heaps of slain are enormous; for it takes seven months to bury them, and seven years to use up their weapons as fire-wood for domestic purposes. “Seven months”, says Ezekiel, “shall the house of Israel be burying of them, that they may cleanse the land.” Then describing the thorough manner in which the buriers shall do their work, so that not a single bone shall be left visible, he finishes this part of his prediction by saying, “Thus shall they cleanse the land.”
But, if the 2400 years terminate at the time of the end, when do they commence, that we may know when the time of the end begins?
The solution of this problem will be found in the pamphlet Chronikon Hebraikon. It is there shown that the “evening-morning” period of Dan. 8:14, should read 2,400 instead of 2,300; and that the reed or rule by which the beginning of this time of the vision should be ascertained is, that the time of a vision must be computed from the first event foreshadowed in the vision; inasmuch as it cannot be perceived that there is any valid reason for the exclusion of any of the events of a vision from its time. My suspicion was not awakened with regard to the correctness of the reading of this text on the publication of the former editions of this work. I am, however, now satisfied that 2,300 is a corruption of some of the Hebrew manuscripts in the hands of Western Jews, from which it found its way into modern versions.
In this vision of Dan. 8, the first event the prophet sees is the last horn of the Ram Power overtopping the first—verse 3. This event came to pass b.c. 540, when the Persian Dynasty of the Ram represented by Cyrus superseded the Median at the death of Darius the Mede. Can any good reason be given why this coming up of the higher horn last, should not be included in the 2,400? I can see none. I accept it, therefore, as the beginning of the vision’s evening-morning time. Hence the question, “How long the vision of the Daily and of the transgression making desolate, to give both the Holy and the Host for a trampling?”—must be understood as an inquiry, “How long shall it be from the Persian Horn overtopping the Median Horn to the Time of the End, when the Holy and the Host shall no longer be given over for a treading down?”—for “to the time of the end shall be the vision”—verse 17. The answer to the question reveals the terminal epoch. So long a time was to elapse before “The Day of Vengeance” came. The 2,400 would not include the day of vengeance, but would conduct to that terrible epoch, concurrent with the end of the Sixth, and all the quadragintal period of the Seventh, vials; that is, an epoch commencing with the opening of the third section of the Frog Sign in which the advent occurs, and continuing in all the period of the Seventh Vial, in which the Seven Thunders utter their voices, and ending with this last vial, which occupies the forty years of Israel’s Exodus testified of in Mic. 7:15.
Now, if my computation be correct, namely, that the 2,400 years terminated in 1860, and that this was the beginning of the time of the end, we ought to find on the political map a “king of the south”, a “king of the north”, and the Little Horn of the Goat, all contemporary. Besides this we ought to find the king of the south making war on the Little Horn, and the land of Israel should be the subject of the strife. I say we ought to find these things in the time of the end, because the time of the vision, or 2,400 years, is to be the time of the end; “for at the time appointed the end shall be”: and it is also written, “He”, the Little Horn of the Goat, “shall divide the land for gain. And at the time of the end the king of the south shall push at him; and the king of the north shall come against him.” It is evident from this that at the time of the end, there are to be two horns of the Goat and the little horn all co-existent, and as hostile in their policy as in the days of Antiochus Epiphanes.
These are the things which ought to be, but what do we find? The answer is just what the prophecy requires. There is the reigning king of Egypt, or of the south; the Russian Autocrat, king of the north, and the Sultan, the representative of the Little Horn of the Goat. The two former were brought up upon the territories of the ancient kings of the north and south, by the pouring out of that determined upon the Little Horn, subsequently to 1820, when the sixth vial began. There had been no kings of the north and south upon the Eastern Roman territory for many centuries previous to this period. The war beween Russia and the Porte, however, in 1828, advanced the frontiers of the Russian empire to Asia Minor, Ararat, and thence to the Caspian; by which a considerable portion of the territory of the old Assyro-Macedonian kingdom is included in the dominions of the Autocrat. He is, therefore, in relation to Judea, the king of the north and representative of Antiochus Epiphanes. He is also “the Assyrian” of the latter days, for whom Tophet is ordained of old.
Very soon after the Russian war, which ended in 1829, Mehemet Ali established himself as king of the south. He attacked and conquered Syria, and for a time was lord ascendant of the east. This exaltation opened new prospects to Mehemet, and he aspired to the throne of the Sultan. The time of the end was not far off, there being only a few years of the 2,400 years to expire. In 1838, Mehemet Ali, king of the south, “pushed at” the Sultan. Hitherto he had confined his operations to Egypt and Syria, but now at the closing of the war he pushed for Constantinople, and advanced as far as Smyrna; and but for the interference of the great powers, unconsciously “to establish the vision”, he would doubtless have dethroned him. Wearied of this state of affairs, which endangered “the balance of power”, England, Russia, Prussia, and Austria undertook to establish peace, and to place things on a permanent footing. They ordered the king of the south to surrender Syria, including palestine, to the sovereignty of the Little Horn; and to restore the Turkish fleet, which had revolted from the Sultan during the war. Mehemet refused to do either; contending that Syria was his as a part of his kingdom for ever by right of conquest; and the fleet, as the spoils of war. These great powers, however, were not to be trifled with. They were willing that the throne of Egypt should be hereditary in his family; but determined that he should only be Pasha of Syria for life. But Mehemet would not yield, and the result was, that the allied fleet bombarded the cities of the Syrian sea-board, and took possession of St. Jean d’Acre. They again offered him “all that part of Syria, extending from the gulf of Suez to the lake of Tiberias, together with the province of Acre for life”, if he would restore the Turkish fleet. But he still refused, and in the autumn of 1840, they compelled the Egyptians to evacuate the country, and determined he should not have it at all; and threatened that if he did not restore the fleet in ten days, they would bombard him in Alexandria. Prudence at length overcame the obstinacy of Mehemet; he therefore yielded, and surrendered the ships within the time. Thus, the land of Israel was returned to the sovereignty of the Little Horn, and Mehemet restricted to the kingdom of Egypt; so that as the result of the sixth vial down to 1840, the political geography of the east had been so changed, that there now existed the king of the south in Egypt, the king of the north towards Ararat, and the dominion of the Little Horn of the Goat between them, extending to the Euphrates.
Such are the important events which mark the end of the 2,400 years, and the approach of the time of the end. They are evidential of the time soon arriving to which the Lord refers, saying, “I will remember my covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and I will remember the land.” Mehemet Ali claimed the land as his for ever; but Jehovah hath said, “The land shall not be sold for ever; for the land is mine”. If, then, the Lord would not permit the Israelites to alienate it from one to another for ever, He would be far from permitting Mehemet to possess it, or the Allies to grant it to him, for ever. The hand of God may be clearly discerned in the events of this epoch. He hardened the king of Egypt’s heart not to accept the land on any other terms than his own, which were certain not to be granted. If they had yielded to his demand, “the Eastern Question” would have been diplomatically settled, and the course of events regarding Israel turned into a different, and perhaps opposite, channel; but as the affair of 1840 has left the country, its destiny remains to be the subject of a future arrangement, when the dominion of the Little Horn subsides into that of the Russo-Assyrian Horn of the Goat.
The eleventh chapter of Daniel is therefore fulfilled as far as the first colon of the fortieth verse. The things which remain to be accomplished in the time of the end are briefly outlined in the remaining part of the chapter. The king of Egypt having pushed at the Little Horn, as we have seen, the next event of the prophecy is an attack upon him by the king of the north, as it is written, “And the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships”; that is, the Russo-Assyrian autocrat shall attack Constantinople by sea and land, and with such whirlwind impetuosity that the Sultan’s dominion shall be swept away. The whirlwind nature of the attack implies, I think, not only its overwhelming character, but that when it is made, the allies of the Sultan will be off their guard; that is, by the Autocrat’s assurances of peace and moderation for which they will give him credit, Constantinople will be left unprotected, and it will fall into his hands before they can come to the rescue. To “push at him”, and to “come against him” are phrases which imply more than simple invasion; they indicate likewise the direction that invasion is to take. In the case of the king of the south, when he “pushed at him”, he directed his course towards Constantinople, but he did not “come against him”, because he was stopped by “the powers”. The king of the north, however, is to do more than push, he is actually to “come against” the Sultan, which can only be done by sitting down before Constantinople.
It is not to be supposed that the Autocrat would attack the Porte without some provocation, real or pretended. It is therefore the mission of the Frogs, as we have seen in a former chapter, to bring about such a state of things as will involve the Autocrat and Sultan in war. The reader will perceive, then, that the operation of the Frog-power comes in between the attacks of the king of Egypt and the Russo-Assyrians upon the Porte. The policy they originate is to involve the whole habitable in war the more immediate effect of which will be, that “the king of the north shall enter the countries, and shall overflow and pass over”. To “enter into the countries” implies invasion; but to “overflow and pass over” indicates conquest. The result of the conquest will be that “many countries shall be overthrown”.
Of the horn-kingdoms, it is predicted, saying, “These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them”; and again, “The Beast and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat upon the horse, and against his army. And (these) the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth; and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.” Now, this field of battle is to be the valley of Megiddo in the land of Israel. In view of this, has the question ever occurred to the reader, what possible inducement could there be for the rulers of Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Italy; etc., to march their armies into Palestine? What inducement was there for the kings of Europe to meet Napoleon at Dresden, and to march their armies into Russia in 1812? It was compulsion, and not inclination. A similar cause will operate on them again. When the king of the north “overflows and passes over” their countries, they will become subject to him as their emperor; and when his autocracy shall attain the extent marked out for it in the Word, his dominion will be fitly represented by Nebuchadnezzar’s Image, of which they will be the toes. They must exist as regal parts of a great dominion until Christ comes: because they are to war with him in person; and because God will set up His kingdom in their time; and, having broken to pieces the power of their imperial ruler on the mountains of Israel, by that same kingdom He will “break in pieces and consume all theirs”.
The overthrow of the Sultan will not be contemplated by the British Government with indifference. They have already beheld continental Europe to the confines of Russia subject to the will of one man, and they are destined to witness it again. They will unquestionably adopt all possible measures to circumvent the Autocrat. England’s Indian Empire, and its contiguity to Asiatic Russia, make her his natural enemy. It will be her policy to prevent him from taking possession of Egypt and the Holy Land; for if he were to do this, he would intercept all communication between England and India by the Red Sea. Hence, while she is the natural enemy of the Autocrat, she is also the natural friend of Egypt and the Jews. The triumph of Russia in the west will cause her to strengthen herself in the east; and, as I shall show, she will take possession of Sheba, Dedan, Edom, Moab, and part of Ammon; colonize Judea with Israelites, and form an intimate alliance of offence and defence with Egypt. Thus the Red Sea will become a British lake; and by holding Gibraltar, Aden, and some commanding position at the entrance of the Persian Gulf, she will be enabled to retain for a short time longer her commercial and maritime ascendancy.
But these measures of the British will be the means of luring on the Autocrat to his destruction. Having fulfilled the mission of his “sacred Russia” to put down rebellion, to plant the Greek cross on the dome of St. Sophia, and to prostrate Europe at his feet, he will next address himself to the work of establishing his dominion over the east. The prosperity of Egypt and Judea will tempt him to seize them for himself; for, as the prophet saith, “He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many shall be overthrown; but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.” He will have proclaimed war against the east; and at the head of his vassal kings and their armies have invaded Syria. The war will be bloody, and his hosts like a cloud to cover the land. Having over-run Syria and Persia, he will invade Egypt, Libya, and Ethiopia. For it is written, “He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape. But he shall have power over the treasures of gold, and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; and the Libyans and Ethiopians shall be at his steps.” This subjugation of Egypt arouses all the indignation of Britain. England’s interference troubles him; for “tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many”. Judea will now feel the weight of his power. He will lay siege to Jerusalem, and take it; for, “He shall pitch his palatial tents in the glorious holy mountain.” “Yet,” though thus far triumphant, “he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.” As a further elucidation of this portion of the book of Daniel, I shall now proceed to speak of the prophecy in relation to
Τὸν Γώγ χαὶ τὸν Μαγώγ
These names occur together in two remarkable prophecies, the one delivered through Ezekiel, and the other through the apostle John. No portion of scripture has been more mangled, perhaps, than these; yet there is none, as it appears to me, more easy to be understood. An illustration of popular opinion on the subject may be seen in Guildhall, or in “the Lord Mayor’s Show”, where two huge giants appear, whom the wise men of Gotham have rhantized “Gog and Magog”! Interpreters have enlightened the public upon this subject about as much as the wooden giants themselves. They generally confound the Gogue and Magogue of Ezekiel with the Gogue and Magogue of the Apocalypse; but if the reader carefully examine the two testimonies, he will find that they have reference to different times exceedingly remote from each other. The Apocalyptic Gogue and Magogue are the nations and their leader, who rebel against the government of Christ and his saints, 1,000 years after the binding of the Greco-Roman Dragon is finished. They are the then existing nations outlying the land of Israel on the north, south, east, and west; who, being seduced from their allegiance, revolt and invade Canaan, and lay siege to Jerusalem, but are destroyed by fire from heaven. They are styled Gogue and Magogue because the confederacy is similar to that of Ezekiel’s prophecy; being a combination of the posterity of the same populations to invade the same land, and take possession of the same city, and for the same purpose—namely, to seize the sceptre of universal empire, which has been the matter of contest since God first put enmity between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman.
If the reader compare the two prophecies, he will discern the following diversities, which prove them to be confederacies belonging to different epochs.
1. The Gogue of Ezekiel invades Judea “in the latter days”; but the Apocalyptic Gogue does not invade the land till 1,000 years after the binding of the dragon;
2. Ezekiel’s Gogue goes forth from the north; John’s from the four corners of the earth;
3. The Ezekiel-Gogue’s invasion is the occasion of the Lord’s manifestation, and therefore pre-millennial; but that of John’s Gogue is after the Lord has reigned with his saints on earth 1,000 years, and therefore post-millennial;
4 The Lord himself brings the Ezekiel-Gogue against Iris land; but some arch-rebel stirs up hitherto loyal nations against the government, and as the Apocalyptic Gogue and Magogue defy the King already in Jerusalem;
5. The Lord brings the Ezekiel-Gogue up to battle against Jerusalem, that He may be made known to the Nations; but John’s Gogue has known Him for 1,000 years.
The prophecy of Ezekiel concerning Gogue evidently relates to a power that is to arise hereafter; for the Lord says in his address to its chief, “In the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.” In another verse of this chapter, the “latter years” are termed “latter days”, as it is written: “And thou shalt come up against my people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land; it shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land.” This testimony shows that there will have been a gathering of the Jews to some extent before Gogue invades their land; and that this gathering is subsequent to a long desolation of the country. Hence, those acquainted with Jewish history will perceive directly that the prediction has not yet been fulfilled; but is yet in the future, and belongs to “the time of the end”, which is synchronous with “the latter days”.
The prophecy of Gogue synchronizes with the events set forth in the forty-first verse of the eleventh chapter of Daniel. In short, Ezekiel’s prophecy of Gogue is an amplification of Daniel’s concerning the king of the north. That these two powers are the same will be manifest from the following considerations:
1. Gogue, or the Prince of Ros, is king of Meshech and Tubal, therefore he is the king of the north geographically; those countries being north of the Holy Land, which, according to the covenant, extends to Amanus and the Euphrates;
2. Gogue is to invade the land of Israel “from the north parts” and “in the latter days”; and the king of the north is to enter into the same country at the same time; therefore, as they come against the same enemy and at the same time, they must be one and the same power;
3. The Libyans and Ethiopians belong to Gogue’s army; and Daniel testifies, that “the Libyans and Ethiopians are at the steps of the king of the north”, that is, they march among his troops;
4. Hostile tidings come to Gogue from Sheba and Dedan eastward; and from “the Merchants of Tarshish and the young lions thereof” northward: so, also, “tidings out of the east and out of the north”, says Daniel, “shall trouble the king of the north”;
5. Gogue is to “fall upon the mountains of Israel”, where he and his multitudes are to be buried; so the king of the north having encamped “between the seas in the glorious holy mountain”, the hill country, “comes to his end” there, “with none to help him”; and,
6. Gogue unexpectedly encounters the Lord God in battle on the mountains of Israel; and the king of the north contends with Michael the great prince, who standeth up for Israel, and delivers them; they are both defeated and deprived of dominion by the same supernatural power.
Here, then, are six particulars, which clearly establish the identity of Gogue with the king of the north. The multitudes they are destined to lead into the Holy Land are the “all nations” which Zechariah has predicted the Lord will gather together against Jerusalem, to destroy them in battle with a small exception, and whose slain are “the carcases of the men that have transgressed against the Lord, whose worm shall not die, nor their fire be quenched; and who shall be an abhorring to all flesh,” who pass through “the valley of the passengers on the east of the sea”; for the consumption of their bodies by the worm will commence while they are yet standing alive upon their feet; so that the stench of their consuming bodies will “stop the noses of the passers by.”
The prophet Ezekiel is addressed by Jehovah as the type, or representative, of him who is to vanquish Gogue on the mountains of Israel. Hence He says to him, “Son of Man, set thy face against Gogue, of the land Magogue, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, and prophesy against him” (R.V.). In this title to the prophecy, the antagonists are indicated—namely, the Son of Man on one side, and Gogue on the other. But, while it is quite clear who the Son of Man is, it is but little understood what power is represented by Gogue. It will, therefore, be my endeavour in the following pages to identify this adversary of Israel and their King; so that the reader may know which of “the powers that be” is chosen of God to personate the serpent’s head when it is crushed by the woman’s seed.
The Jews appointed by Ptolemy Philadelphus, king of Egypt, to translate the Old Testament into Greek, gave a different rendering of the title to that which appears in the Authorized English Version. They rendered the original by Γὼγ, ἂρχουτα ῾Ρὼς, Μεσὸχ χαι Θοβὲλ i.e., Gogue, Prince of Ros, Mesoch, and Thobel; so that the difference of the two translations turns upon the Hebrew word rosh being regarded as a proper, or a common, noun. The Seventy were sensible that in this place it was not an appellative noun, but a proper name; and they rendered it accordingly by Ros. But Jerome not finding any such proper name among the nationfamilies mentioned in Genesis, rather disputed the Septuagint reading, and preferred to consider the word Ros as a common noun; and his interpretation, established in the Latin Vulgate, has universally prevailed throughout the west. Jerome, however, was more scrupulous then the editors of later versions, who have unqualifiedly rejected it as a common name; for although he inclined to the other rendering, he did not feel authorized to reject altogether one so ancient, and he has therefore preserved them both, translating the passage thus—“Gogue, terram Magogue, principem capitis (sive Ros) Mosoch, et Thubal.”
But the question between the phrases “the chief prince”, and “the prince of Ros”, has been long set at rest by the concurring judgment of the learned, who have adopted the primitive interpretation of the Alexandrine Jews. And although the common English version has not the benefit of their decision, yet the title of the prophecy has been generally received among the erudite portion of the western nations for nearly 200 years, according to the ancient Greek interpretation; that is to say, as uniting the three proper names of nations, Ros, Mosc, and Tobl. By the insertion of vowels, or vowel-points, the Hebrew words have been made to assume the different forms of Meshech, Mesoch, Tubal, and Thobel; but, as the meaning of Hebrew words depends not on the points, but upon the radical consonants, or letters, it may be as well to express these names by the forms and elements of the original words, for by so doing we keep nearer to the original idea, and are less likely to be mystified by hypothesis. “Ros,” says David Levi, “is not an appellative as in the common translation of the Bible, but a proper name.” The word “chief” ought, therefore, to be replaced by the proper name Ros, or Rosh.
But what nations are signified by these three proper names? This question has been long since determined by the learned. The celebrated Bochart, about the year 1640, observed in his elaborate researches into Sacred Geography, that ῾ΡΩΣ, Ros, is the most ancient form under which history makes mention of the name of Russia; and he contended that Ros and Mosc properly denote the nations of Russia and Moscovy. “It is credible”, says he, “that from Rhos and Mesech (that is the Rhossi and Moschi), of whom Ezekiel speaks, descended the Russians and Moscovites, nations of the greatest celebrity in European Scythia.” We have, indeed, ample and positive testimony, that the Russian nation was called ΡΩΣ, Ros, by the Greeks in the earliest period in which we find it mentioned, as, ̓̀Εθνος δὲ οἱ ῾Ρὼς Σχύθιχον, περὶ τὸν ἂρχτωον Ταυ̂ρον; that is, “the Ros are a Scythian nation, bordering on the northern Taurus”. And their own historians say, “It is related that the Russians (whom the Greeks called ῾Ρώς, Ros, and sometimes ïRw;so~, Rosos) derived their name from Ros, a valiant man, who delivered his nation from the yoke of their tyrants.”
Thus, then, we discern the modem names of Russia and of Moscow, or Moskwa, in the ancient names of Ros and Mosc, or Musc. It is not difficult to recognize in Tobl, Tubl, or Thobel, a name which naturally connects itself with them; and which, in conjunction with them, tends, in a very remarkable manner, to determine and fix the proper object of the prediction. The river Tobol gives name to the City Tobolium, or Tobolski, the metropolis of the extensive region of Siberia, lying immediately eastward of the territories of Moscovy, or Mosc. Tobol and Mosc are mentioned together by Ezekiel who characterizes them as nations trading in copper; a metal which, it is notorious, abounds in the soil of Siberia; a region which includes all the northern part of Asia which borders on Russia to the west, on the Arctic Ocean to the north, on the Pacific Ocean on the east, and on Central Asia to the south. And thus the three denominations Ros, Mosc, and Tobl, united in prophecy, point out, with equal capacity and conciseness, those widely extended regions, which, at the present day, we denominate collectively THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE.
Gogue is styled the “Prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl”, that is, Autocrat of the Russians, Moscovites, and Siberians, or of “All the Russias”. But he is also styled “Gogue of the land of Magogue”, as well. There is something important in this. It affirms that he is sovereign of Magogue as well as prince of all the Russias; for there, at the time of the prophecy, is his proper dominion. “Whoever reads Ezekiel”, says Michaelis, “can hardly entertain a doubt that Gogue is the name of a sovereign, and Magogue that of his people; the prophet speaks of the former, not as a people but as AN EMPEROR.” Let us, then, now inquire, where is the region styled Magogue: that we may be enabled to ascertain of what people besides the Russians Gogue will be the Emperor. And as Gomer, and Togarmah of the north quarters, are represented as being connected with him, we shall also endeavour to find out what modem nations will answer to these names.
We know from the Hebrew scriptures that Magogue and Gomer were the names of the two sons of Japheth: and it is to ancient Hebrew authority alone that we can resort to learn where, according to the common repute of the Israelites, the nations which descended from these two heads of families, and which long retained the proper names of those heads, were spread and established. Josephus says, “that Japhet, the son of Noah, had seven sons; who, proceeding from their primitive seats in the mountains of Taurus and Amanus, ascended Asia to the river Tanais (or Don); and there entering Europe, penetrated as far westward as the Straits of Gibraltar, occupying the lands which they successively met with in their progress; all of which were uninhabited; and bequeathed their names to their different families, or nations. That Gomer founded the Gomari, whom the Greeks, at that time, called Galatæ—τοὺς νυ̂ν ὑφʼ ῝Ελληνων Γαλάτας χαλούμενους;—and that Magogue founded the Magogæ, whom the Greeks then called Scythæ, Σχύθαι.” It only, therefore, remains for us to ascertain which were the nations that the Greeks, in the time of Josephus, called Scythæ, and which they then called Galatœ; and to observe whether the geographical affinities of these nations are such as answer to those which are plainly required by the prophecy for Magogue and Gomer.
Herodotus, the most ancient Greek writer accessible, acquaints us “that the name Scythæ was a name given by the Greeks to an ancient and widely extended people of Europe, who had spread themselves from the river Tanais, or Don, westward along the banks of the Ister, or Danube”. “The Greeks,” observes Major Rennel, “appear to have first used the term Scythia, in its application to their neighbouts, the Scythians of the Euxine, who were also called Getœ; , or Gothi; and were those who afterwards subdued the Roman empire: and from which original stock the present race of people in Europe seem to be descended.” And again, “the Scythians of Herodotus appear to have extended themselves in length from Hungary, Transylvania, and Wallachia, on the westward, to the river Don on the eastward.” Thus the testimony of Herodotus and Josephus is in perfect agreement concerning the progress of Magogue and Gomer. In these same regions the Scythæ continued many ages after Herodotus, and even long after the time of Josephus; for Dion Cassius, who lived 150 years after Josephus, and above 200 after Christ, relates, that Pompey, in his return into Europe from Asia, “determined to pass to the Ister, or Danube, through the Scythæ; and so to enter Italy”. These were the original Scythæ. But Herodotus states further, that a portion of the same people, in an after age, turned back upon the European seats of their lathers, and established themselves in Asia; and from these sprung the Asiatic Scythæ, who, in process of time, almost engrossed the name to themselves.
Since the name of Scythæ, i.e., Magogue is to be considered not by itself, but in geographical connection with Galatæ, or Gomer, we have only to inquire, whether any geographical affinity is really ascribed by the Greeks to the Scythæ and Galatæ; and to ascertain to what regions of the earth those names, so associated were applied. If we can discover these two points, we ought thereby to have discovered specifically the Magogue of the prophecy, which is to be associated with the region, or people of Gomer.
Diodorus Siculus, who lived about a century before Josephus, traces them much further into Europe than the Danube; even to the shores of the Baltic, and to the very confines of the Galatæ of the Greeks. In speaking of the amber-found upon the shores of that sea, he there places the region expressly denominated, “Scythia above, or north of, Galatia”. In which description we at length find the Scythæ, or Magogue, in the immediate neighbourhood of the Galatæ of the Greeks, or Gomer.
Galatia, Γαλατία, is the common and familiar name used by all the earlier Greek historians for Gaul, the Gailia of the Latins; and Galatæ, Γαλάται, is the common Greek name for Gauls, or the Galli of the Latins. Thus, “all the Galatæ” (or Gauls), says Strabo, “were called Celtæ by the Greeks”; and the converse is equally true: “the Celtæ were called Galatæ by the Greeks, and Galli by the Latins.” To inquire, Who were “the Galatæ of the Greeks”? is, therefore, the same as to inquire, Who were the Galli of the Romans? A colony of these Galatæ, or Galli, indeed, in the third century before Christ, emigrated from Gaul and established themselves in Asia Minor; where they were ever after called by their Greek name Galatians. Diodorus’ “Scythia above Gaul extending towards the Baltic”, accurately describes that large tract of Europe above the Rhine, or northern boundary of Gaul, through which flow the rivers Elbe, Ems, and Weser. Here, and in the countries immediately adjoining, were the SCYTHÆ bordering upon the GALATÆ on the north; that is to say, a considerable part of MAGOGUE, geographicaly associated with GOMER. Diodorus elsewhere describes the northeln part of Galatia, or Gaul, as confining upon Scythia. “The Greeks”, says he, “call those who inhabit Marseilles and the inland territory, and all those who dwell towards the Alps and the Pyrenean Mountains, by the name of Celts; but those who occupy the country lying to the northward, between the Ocean and the Hercynian mountain, and all others as far as Scythia, they denominate Galatæ; but the Romans call all those nations by one collective appellation, Galatæ; that is, Galli.” These geographical affinities unite in the name of Celto-Scythæ, mentioned by Strabo. “The ancient Greeks”, says he, “at first called the northern nations by the general name of Scythians; but when they became acquainted with the nations in the West, they began to call them by different names of Celts, Celto-Scythæ”; and again, “the ancient Greek historians called the northern nations, collectively, Scythians, and Celto-Scythæ”; which latter name plainly denoted the most western portion of the Scythæ, adjoining Gaul; of the number of whom were the Scythæ on the north of the Galatæ, or the Σχύθαι ὑπέρ Γαλατίαν.
In this general description may easily be discerned that extended portion of the West of Europe, comprehending ancient Gaul, Belgium, and the countries bordering upon them, which constituted in our day the Napoleon empire. Gomer, then, points immediately to France. It is a curious coincidence that Louis Philippe paid his visit to England in the Gomer. When this vessel was thus named, did they adopt it allusively to their country being originally peopled by the descendants of Gomer? “Scythia above Gaul”, or Magogue above Gomer, or to the north of it, through which flowed the Elbe, Ems, and Weser, was the country from whence proceeded principally that renowned people, who, in the early ages of Romanism, formed an extensive confederacy with their kindred nations upon the Rhine, which had migrated successively thither from the regions of the Danube; and who, under the common denomination of FRANKS, overran Gaul, and subdued it; and finally establishing their power and population in the conquered country, permanently superseded the name of Gaul by that of FRANCE. “As for the seats of the Franks”, says the “Universal History”, “it appears from their constant excursions into Gaul, that they dwelt on the banks of the Rhine, in the neighbourhood of Mentz. All historians speak of them as placed there till their settling in Gaul. Their country, according to the best modern geographers and historians, was bounded on the north by the Ocean; on the west by the Ocean and the Rhine; on the south by the Maine; and on the east by the Weser.”
These, therefore, were the Κελτό—Σχύθαι, or Σχύθαι ὑπέρ τήν Γαλατίαν, the Celto-Scythians, or Scythians on the northern confine of Gaul; that is, Magogue in contiguity with Gomer. The Chaldean interpreter applies the name of Magogue to the Germans; in short, all the ancients looked for the Magogue of scripture in the West. The Scythæ of Asia, who, as we have seen, were only a partial emigration, or reflux, from their ancient stock in Europe, cannot, with any soundness of criticism, be taken account of in this argument.
“Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands”, is also to form a part of the Gogue’s confederacy against the Holy Land in “the time of the end”. There is little said about Togarmah in history beyond conjecture. He was a son of Gomer, therefore his posterity would migrate originally from the same locality as Gomer’s other descendants—namely, from the mountains of Taurus and Amanus; but, instead of going westward with their brethren, they diffused themselves over “the north quarters”, that is, relatively to Judea. Ezekiel says, “The house of Togarmah traded in the Tyrian fairs with horses, and horsemen, and mules”. Hence doubtless they were a nomadic people, tending flocks and herds in the pasture lands of the north, where nature favoured their production with little care and expense. Russian, and Independent, Tartary are the countries of Togarmah, from which in former times poured forth the Turcoman cavalry, “which”, says Gibbon, “they proudly computed by millions”. Georgia and Circassia, probably, are “bands of Togarmah’s house”.
These, then, are the regions which are to supply the numerous and formidable armies with which their arrogant and mighty Emperor, prophetically denominated Gogue, is hereafter “to ascend as a cloud”, against the Holy Land, not long after he shall have gone, “like a whirlwind”, against the Little Horn. Let us now consider, as brieflly as possible, the applicability of this word to the Prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl.
“Gogue of the land Ma-gogue”, that is, styling the ruler of Magogue by the latter syllable of the name of the country over which he rules. We have seen that Magogue is the region extending from the Ros, or Russia, to the Rhine, comprehending Wallachia, Transylvania, Hungary, and Germany. Of course, the prophecy must be future, because the Prince of the Ros is the Gogue of Magogue; and as yet no Emperor of Russia has been also Emperor of Germany, etc. But why is the future autocrat of Gomer Magogue, Ros, Mosc, Tobl, and Togarmah, styled Gogue?
There is no name in the Bible which has more puzzled the critics than this of Gogue. The depths of Hebrew etymology have been explored in vain, and the versatile efforts of ingenuity in vain exerted, in the search for a mystical sense which might attach to this name. But Gogue is a Gentile, and not a Hebrew name; and Michaelis has correctly remarked, “that the origin of a barbaric, or foreign name, ought not to be sought for in the Hebrew, nor in any of its kindred tongues, as many have erroneously done”. An early nineteenth century writer, who very incorrectly applied the name to Napoleon, refers to Fredegarius’ History as the only satisfactory account of any person of the name of Gogue. Without adopting his application of it to the French Emperor, I will give the substance of what he says concerning it.
It is a proper name well known to continental history: and borne in one notable instance by an ancient ruler, which answers immediately to the Magogue of the scriptures. Gogue was the proper name of the Major Domus Regiæ, or chief of the palace, who, after having been exalted by the voice of the nation to the highest authority, fell by a violent and sanguinary death. The name of this personage appears in the history which is written in Latin tinder the double form of Gogo (-onis) and Gogus (-i); these different terminations and inflexions having been suffixed to the original name. But although modern authors have followed those Latin forms, the name has nevertheless been preserved in the vernacular tongue, with its genuine, original, and simple enunciation of Gogue.
About sixty years after the death of Sigebert, King of Austrasia, a.d. 575, Fredegarius undertook to write the history of his reign, in which he gives the following account of Gogue:—
“When Sigebert (grandson of Clovis) saw that his brothers had contracted marriages with women of inferior condition, he sent Gogue on an embassy to the King of Spain, to demand his daughter, Bruna, in marriage. The King sent her, with great treasures, to Sigebert; and in order to add greater dignity to her name, it was changed to Brunechildis. Sigebert received her for his consort, with great rejoicings.
“Prior to this event, and during the infancy of Sigebert, the Austrasians had made choice of the Duke Chrodinus, to be Major Domus Regiæ, or chief of the palace; because he was a man of vigorous conduct in affairs, fearing God, endued with patience and possessing no quality but what rendered him dear both to God and men. Chrodinus rejected the honour proffered to him, saying, ‘I am unable to establish peace in Austrasia, for all the nobles and gentry of Austrasia are allied to me by blood; and I have not the power of enforcing discipline amongst them, or of taking away the life of any man. They will all rise against me, to follow their own superstitions; and God forbid, that their actions should draw me into the condemnation of hell. Choose ye, therefore, from among yourselves whom ye may approve.’
“When they could find no one they chose Gogue, the tutor of the prince, by the advice of Chrodinus, to be Major Domus Regiæ. And on the following morning Chrodinus repaired the first to the dwelling of Gogue, and placed his arm upon his neck; which the rest perceiving, they all followed his example. And thus was the government of Gogue prosperous; until he brought Brunechildis out of Spain. But she soon rendered him odious to Sigebert, who, by her instigation, put him to death.”
The high authority of Gogue while he held the reins of the Austrasian Government, is strongly marked in the complimentary poems addressed to him by Fortunatus, Bishop of Poitiers, a distinguished poet of that age; from one of which the following passage, translated from the Latin, may be worthy of selection, on account of its geographical references, so remarkably connecting the proper name of Gogue with the Rhenish section of Magogue.
Ye clouds whose course the northern winds impel,
Of my lov’d Gogue some grateful tidings tell!
Say, with what health his valued life is blest;
What peaceful cares engage his tranquil breast.
If on the banks of Rhine awhile he stay,
Where the rich salmon yields itself a prey.
Or where Moselle through vineyards guides her stream,
While gentle breezes cool the sultry gleam,
Or flowing waters mitigate the heat
And with fresh waves the bowery margins greet.
Or where the Meuse in murmurs soft is heard,
Mid threefold wealth, of vessel, fish, and bird.
Or where the Aisne through grassy banks is borne,
Whose waters nourish pasturage and corn.
Or if by Oise, by Sare, by Cher, or Scheld,
Somme, Sambre, Saur, the loitering Chief beheld,
Or when the Seille, with mouth expanded, laves
Metz’ stately bulwarks with her copious waves.
Or if in forest shades he seeks his prey,
With toil, or spear, to capture, or to slay.
Or if on Ardenne’s wild, or Vosge’s height.
The echoing woods resound his arrow’s flight.
Or if, return’d beneath his princely dome,
Their lord, a zealous people welcome home.
Of the origin, or family, of Gogue, the first Maire du Palais, or Dux Francorum, of the kingdom of Austrasia, no mention is made in history; but it is plainly to be collected from the words of Chrodinus, that he had no consanguinity with either the nobles or the gentry—the “primates”, or “liberi”, of that kingdom; and it seems equally implied in the words of Fredegarius, that he was not a native of the kingdom, since he was elected to his dignity because the Austrasians could find no one among themselves.
Thus, it is evident that Gogue is an historical character, and that he was Regent of a part of Magogue. Now, it is probable that, because of certain peculiarities in his history in relation to Magogue, God selected his name as the prophetic title of one who should rule over the same country in “the time of the end”. The resemblance between the historical and prophetic Gogues may be stated as follows. I shall distinguish them as Gogue I and Gogue II.
1. Gogue I was a foreigner; Gogue II will be one likewise, belonging to the Ros, and not to the Germans;
2. Gogue I became sovereign in fact, though not de jure; Gogue II will become sovereign in fact by conquest;
3. Gogue I became ruler in a time of confusion, because the native princes could not maintain order; weakness of the sovereigns, and anarchy of the people, will precede the de facto sovereignty of Gogue II also;
4. Gogue I, though exalted to the highest post of honour and power, short only of the legitimate sovereignty, was precipitated from his high estate by a violent death. This is also the destiny of the prophetic Gogue, who is to “come to his end, and no one shall help him”.
With these premises before us, I have no doubt that the following paraphrase will present the reader with the true import of the exordium to the prophecy of Ezekiel concerning Gogue.
“Son of Man, set thy face against Gogue, the Emperor of Germany, Hungary, etc., and Autocrat of Russia, Moscovy, and Tobolskoi, and prophesy against him, and say, Thus saith the Lord God: Behold I am against thee, O Gogue, Autocrat of Russia, Moscovy, and Tobolskoi: and I will turn thee about, and put a bit into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth from the north parts, and all thine army, horses, and horsemen, all of them accoutred with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords: among whom shall be Persians, Ethiopians, and Libyans,; all of them with shields and helmet: French and Italians, etc.; Circassians, Cossacks, and the Tartar hordes of Usbeck, etc.: and many people not particularly named besides. Be thou prepared; prepare thyself, thou, and all thy company that axe assembled unto thee; and be thou Imperial Chief to them.”
From these premises, then, I think, there cannot be the shadow of a doubt that the Autocrat of Russia, when he shall have attained to the plenitude of his power and dominion, is the subject of the prophecy contained in the thirty-eighth and thirty-ninth of Ezekiel. This personage at present is only “Autocrat of All the Russias”, that is, of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl; while the Emperor of Austria holds the position of Gogue and Magogue. But, as we have seen elsewhere, the Austrian and German empire is doomed to extinction by fire and sword; so that when this is broken up the Gogueship will be assumed by the Autocrat, or “prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl”.
Having proved as I think, that the phrase “Gogue of the land of Magogue” signifies Emperor of Germany, and that the particular emperor referred to will also be the “prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl”—that is, that at some time hereafter, and that not far off, a Czar of Russia will be both Emperor of Germany and Autocrat of All the Russias—I proceed to remark that, although the Son of Man is his conqueror, he is to be antagonized by another power before he comes to fight his last battle, in which he loses both his life and crown. Ezekiel informs us that Gogue’s earthly adversary occupies the countries of Sheba, Dedan, and Tarshish; and that when the Autocrat (for Gogue is an autocrat, ruling by his own will) invades the Holy Land for the purpose of spoiling the Jews, the Lion-power of these countries assumes a threatening attitude, and dares him to execute his purpose. “Art thou come to take a spoil? Hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey?” Thus it speaks to Gogue: as much as to say, “Thou shalt not spoil Israel and subdue their country, if we can help it.”
The prophet Daniel, however, shows that the only effect of these threatening tidings is to make him furious; for he says, “Therefore shall he go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many”. But furious as Daniel represents him, Ezekiel testifies that he meets with one more potently furious than himself. But this is not the Lion-power of Tarshish, but the Lord God Himself, “whose fury comes up into his face” when He beholds the extortioner and spoiler ravening upon His prey. The lion-andmerchant-power of Tarshish will not be permitted to usurp the glory of the Lion of the tribe of Judah. It is to the latter that Jehovah hath assigned the work of delivering His people from the destroyer. The Lion-power of Tarshish, which will possess Edom and Moab, and Ammon, as well as Sheba and Dedan, will be indeed a covert to Jehovah’s outcasts; and therefore will “Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon escape out of his hand”; but it is only Michael the great prince, who commands the artillery of heaven, that can “break in pieces the oppressor”. The men upon the face of the land shall shake at his presence; and the solid earth itself will be convulsed. He will turn their swords against themselves; and Judah shall fall upon them, and augment the slain. Mutual slaughter and pestilence will be aggravated by terrors from above; for “the Lord of hosts will visit them with thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and tempest”, and “an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, and brimstone”. “Thus”, saith He, “will I magnify myself, and sanctify myself; and I will be known in the eyes of many nations, and they shall know that I (Jesus) am the Lord.”
But what is the lion-power of which Ezekiel speaks? To ascertain this we must direct our attention to the countries named in connection with “the young lions”. Of these, Sheba and Dedan axe districts of Arabia. The men of Dedan are in the list given by Ezekiel of the traders in the Tyrian fairs. The Dedanim carried thither the ivory and ebony which they procured from “the many isles” to the eastward, and “precious clothes for chariots”. Sheba carried the “chief of all spices, precious stones, and gold”. Dedan and Sheba were those parts of Arabia which lay convenient to the ivory, gold, precious stones, and spice countries of Africa and India. The Sultan of Muscat now rules the country of Dedan; while the British have planted their standard on the soil of Sheba, at Aden, the Gibraltar of the Red Sea, and key of Egypt.… The British power is the lion-power of Sheba.
As to Tarshish, there were two countries of that name in the geography of the ancients. Jehoshaphat built ships at Ezion-geber, a port of the Red Sea, that they might sail thence to Tarshish. Now, it will be seen by the map that they could only sail southward towards the straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, from which they might then steer east, or north, for India. As they did not sail by compass in those days, but coastwise, they would creep round the coast of Arabia, and so make for Hindostan. They might have sailed southward again along the coast of Africa instead of to India; but it is not likely they did, as the commerce of the time was with the civilized world, and not the savage. The voyage occupied them three years. In the days of Solomon the trade was shared between Israel and the Tyrians; for “he had at sea a navy of Tarshish with the navy of Hiram; once in three years came the navy of Tarshish bringing gold and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.” These products point to India as the Eastern Tarshish—a country which has always conferred maritime ascendancy on the power which has possessed its trade and been its carrier to the nations.
But there was also a Tarshish to the north-west of Judea. This appears in the case of Jonah, who embarked at Joppa, now Jaffa, on the Mediterranean, “to flee unto Tarshish from the presence of the Lord”. It is evident he must have sailed westward. It is not exactly known where the western Tarshish was situated. It was a country, however, not a city, whose “merchants” frequented the Tyrian fairs. Addressing Tyre, the prophet says, “Tarshish was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of all kinds of riches; with silver, iron, tin, and lead they traded in thy fairs”. These metals are the products of Britain, celebrated by the Phoenicians as Baratanac, or “the land of tin”, as some construe it. The merchandise of the northern Tarshish, and of the eastern, identifies Britain and India with the two countries of that name; and Sheba and Tarshish in the prophecy of Gogue are manifestly indicative of the Lion-power of the AngloIndian empire.
But, in corroboration of this, I remark further, that the lionpower is represented also as a merchant power, in the words, “the Merchants of Tarshish shall say unto Gogue”. Having ascertained the geography of Tarshish, it is easy to answer the question, Who are its merchants? This inquiry will admit of but one answer, namely, the British East India Company, which is both the merchant and the ruler of the elephant-tooth country of the east. But the association of “the young lions of Tarshish” with the “merchants of Tarshish”, makes this still more obvious; for it represents the peculiar constitution of the Anglo-Indian government. As everyone knows, this government is neither purely a merchantsovereignty, nor a purely imperial one like that of Canada, but a combination of the two. The Honourable Company has no power in Canada, but, with its imperial partner, the firm is omnipotent in India. Now the imperial member is represented in the prophet by “young lions”; that is, the lion is chosen to represent the imperial British power, as the Ram and the Goat, the self-chosen emblems of the nations, were adopted to symbolize that of the Persians and Macedonians. Young rams and young goats were civil and military officials under the ram and goat sovereignties; as also “young lions” are the same under the old Lion of England. This, the lion-power, is represented in the government of India by “the Board of Control”, and the imperial forces which serve with the Company’s troops in the Indian Army. The merchants of Tarshish govern India under the control of the lion-power—a constitution of things well represented in the Company’s arms, which are a shield whose quarterings are filled with young lions rampant, with the motto, “Auspicio Senaťs Angliæ;”. From these facts, it may be concluded, that the united imperial power of Britain and merchant-power of India, is the power of the latter days, destined of God to contend with the Autocrat, when, having laid all Europe prostrate, his ambition prompts him to grasp the sceptre of the east.
But the lion-power of Britain has not yet attained the limit marked out for it by the finger of God. The conquest of Persia by the Autocrat will doubtless cause England to conquer Afghanistan, and to seize upon Dedan that she may command the entrance to the Persian gulf, and so prevent him from obtaining access to India either by land or sea. Possessing Persia and Mesopotamia, the apprehension of his pushing still further southward, and perhaps establishing himself on the north-eastern coast of the Red Sea, and so taking them in the rear and gaining access to India by the straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, will also be a powerful motive for the merchants of Tarshish and its young lions to take possession of all the coast from the Gulf of Persia to the Straits, and thence to Suez, by which the lion-power will not only become the Sheba and Dedan, but also the Edom, Moab, and Ammon, of “the latter days”; for in speaking of the events of these days, the prophets refer not to races of men, but to powers on territories designated by the names of the people who anciently inhabited them. Hence, for instance, the Lion-power planted hereafter in the ancient territory of Moab, becomes the Moab of the latter days; so that when the countries before-named are possessed and settled by the British, they will be men of Dedan in Muscat, men of Sheba in Aden and Mocha, and Moabites, Edomites, and Ammonites in their several territories. Thus, the prophecies concerning those countries in their latter-day developments have regard to the power to which they then belong, and which, I have no doubt, will be the British; which, together with the Autocrat’s, though henceforth always rival dominions, will endure until both powers be broken up by the Ancient of Days.
It may be as well in this place to recall the reader’s attention briefly to the vision of the four Beasts. The Lion, the Bear, and the Leopard, the symbols of the Assyrian, the Persian, and of a greater dominion than that comprehended in the four heads of the Leopard, or horns of the Goat; therefore, I will call it Alexandrine: these three Beasts are represented in the vision as out-living the destruction of the Fourth Beast, or Roman Dragon. Speaking of this, the prophet says, “I beheld till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame”. Having seen his violent death, he goes on to say, “As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away; yet a prolonging in life was given them for a season and a time”. The meaning of this is, that at the consummation of the judgment, the territories comprehended in the dominions of the four beasts to their full extent will be divided between two independent dominions of the Latter Days—namely, that of Gogue and that of the Lion of Tarshish. Gogue’s will include so much of the territory as to entitle his dominion to be represented by Nebuchadnezzar’s Image. Assyria proper, Persia, Asia Minor, Armenia, and Mesopotamia; Egypt, Italy, Germany, Belgium, France, Spain, Portugal, Sardinia, Naples, Lombardy, Bavaria, Hungary, and Greece—countries all included in the catalogue given by Ezekiel in his prophecy of Gogue—are symbolized by the head, breast, body, thighs, legs, and toes of the Image. These are at the crisis united together in one dominion, which is broken to pieces as the result of the battle of Armageddon. Gogue’s yoke being broken off the neck of these nations, Assyria and Persia resume their independence; but they do not retain it long, for it is “taken away”, yet they continue separate states for 1,000 years, only ruled by the saints, whom the Lord may appoint over them.
The Lion of Tarshish is Alexandrine in its dominion, and will then possess much of the territory represented by the Unicorn Goat and the Leopard—all, indeed, not included in the Image. Alexander the Great extended his conquests over Afghanistan, the Punjaub, and into India beyond the Indus. The Lion of Tarshish has already annexed much of his territory, indeed quite sufficient to confer upon it Unicom and Leopard attributes. Its supremacy over the Ionian Republic still further approximates it to the Macedonian character: which will become still more conspicuous, when it beholds “the prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl” possessed of Constantinople, and contending for the Gogueship of Magogue; it will, then, doubtless, make extensive seizures of the Isles of Greece, to strengthen itself in the Mediterranean, and to antagonize, as much as possible, the power of the Autocrat in that direction. Thus, then, answering to the Leopard of the latter days, the Lion of Tarshish survives the destruction of the Image. But subsequent events will affect it in common with the Lion and the Bear; for though it may, in alliance with Assyria and Persia, hold out for a time against the Stone of Israel, its “dominion will be taken away”; for the kingdom he is to establish will “break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms”; yet Assyria, Persia, and Britain will continue to exist as people for “a season and a time”, being subject and obedient to the King of Israel, in the light of whose government they will walk with joy, and lay their wealth and honour at his glorious feet.