« AnteriorContinuar »
therefore, that where it ftands separate from any of these emblems, it should ftill bear a fenfe equally limited. In those other chapters, ch. xvi. and xx. where the Dragon is introduced, its meaning muft indeed of neceffity be different; because it is there fpoken of as exifting at a time ftill future, and therefore many centuries pofterior to the diffolution of the empire of Pagan Rome- The fact accordingly appears to be this, that whilft the tenhorned Beast is the representative only of the modern antichristian governments established in the Western part of the Roman Empire; the Dragon, being employed as a fymbol of larger import, is put for Monarchical Tyranny in general. And that I may not be fufpected of arbitrarily annexing to it this meaning, I fhall refer to the teftimony of three very ancient writers, Horapollo, Manetho, and Achmet, whose authority, great as it is, has not I believe been hitherto appealed to upon this subject. Of these the two former were Egyptians. The one, Horapollo, was the author of a fhort treatise on Hieroglyphics, which is ftill extant, having been translated out of the Egyptian, into the Greek, language: the other, Manetho, was a learned priest of Heliopolis, who, about the year 258 before the Chriftian æra, and by command of Ptolemy Philadephus, wrote a great hiftoric work, of which fome fragments are preferved in ancient writers. We learn from Horapollo, that the figure of a ferpent was a well-known hieroglyphic for a king 23: we are told by Manetho, that Yk, which in the Egyptian language fignifies a ferpent, in the Sacred Dialect fignified alfo a king24: and we are informed by Achmet that Spxxww, that is to fay, the ferpent of the larger and more
23 Horapollinis Hieroglyphica, lib. i. cap. 59, 60, 61, 63, 64.
24 Apud Josephum contra Apionem, l. i, e. 14. See Warburton's Legat. vol. ii. p. 141.
destructive kind, which we have thought proper to translate the dragon, was regarded, not only by the Egyptians, but likewise by the Perfians and Indians, as an established emblem of a monarch25. Now it is the declaration of bp. Hurd, that the prophetic ftyle ABOUNDS in hiero'glyphic fymbols, properly fo called 26.'
As paffages from Daubuz have been repeatedly cited, in the present and in the preceding chapter, and will again be cited, the reader perhaps, in the courfe of the work, may feel fome curiofity with respect to the man, to whom the Chriftian world is fo much indebted for fixing the meaning of the fymbolic language; and as his merit was overlooked, and himself scantily provided for in his own life-time, I do on that account experience, like the writer of the fubfequent account, the greater pleasure in introducing a just tribute of respect to his memory. Charles Daubuz' was born. in the province ' of Guienne in France. His only furviving parent,
Julia Daubuz, profeffing the reformed religion, was 'driven in 1686 from her native country by that relent
lefs perfecution, which preceded the revocation of the edict of Nantes. She, with her family, found an ' asylum in England.-Charles her son, destined to the 'miniftry from his earlieft years, was admitted a fizer of "Queen's College,' Cambridge, Jan. 10, 1689; and, about 10 years afterwards, was presented' to the vica'rage of Brotherton, a fmall village near Ferry-Bridge ' in the Weft-Riding of Yorkshire. This vicarage, of 'the annual value of fixty or seventy pounds, was all the
25 Achmetis Oneirocritica, p. 259. Of modern writers I fhall cite two. That the dragon has the fignification of a tyrant, Matthias Martinus observes in his Lexicon Philologicum et Sacrum; and that it bears this sense in fcripture Peter Ravanell declares. A new edition of the Bibliotheca Sacra of this learned Frenchman was printed at Geneva in 1660.
26 Vol. II. p. 113. ́
' preferment he ever enjoyed. To fupport a numerous
and infant family, (for at his death he left a widow and 'eight children, the eldest of whom was not fourteen years old) he was under the neceffity of engaging ⚫ himself in the education of feveral gentlemen's fons in the neighourhood.-He was a conftant refident in his 'parish until the time of his death. He always retained 'the character of a pious, humble, and benevolent man.
His parishioners, who long regretted the loss of their ex'cellent paftor, loved and refpected him.-In the privacy ⚫ of his retirement at Brotherton, unpatronised and unrewarded, with scarce a fingle fmile of favour to exhilarate 'his labours, or to animate his pursuits, he composed the whole of his Perpetual Commentary on the Revelation
of St. John, with a learned and elaborate Preliminary Difcourfe concerning the principles upon which that ' revelation is to be understood. Were I inclined to use the embellishments of panegyric, I might expatiate
at large upon his fingular modefty, his moft extenfive and ftri&tly accurate knowledge of the Greek and Latin authors, his happy application of that knowledge in elucidating the words of prophecy, his intimate acquain⚫tance with the fymbolical character and language of the • Eastern nations, his temperate and discreet judgment, 'totally removed from the indulgence of fancy and ca' pricious coujecture. The following anecdote was communicated to me from the best authority. When he had finished his Commentary, he went to Cambridge to ⚫ confult Dr. Bentley, the great critic of the age". The 'doctor, as it is fuppofed, thinking that Mr. Daubuz
⚫ would out-fhine him in learning and eclipfe his glory,
7 The following fact is from Whifton's Memoirs of his Own Life,
P. 107. Daubuz's Commentary on the Apocalypse, on account of the
great critical fagacity of its author therein fhewed, Dr. Bentley had inhigh efteem.'
'or, which is more probable, knowing that works of that kind, however excellent they might be, were little re⚫lished in those times, did not encourage him to publish
it. Upon which Mr. Daubuz returned home, wearied ' in body and unhappy in mind, fickened of a pleuritic ⚫ fever, and died in a few days. The book was published 'foon after his death 28. The merit of this pious and
⚫ truly learned man seems to have been disregarded in his
life-time; nor has due juftice been done to his memory 'fince his demife.-We cannot but lament, that the
ftrange and unaccountable predilection, which has long
⚫ impeded the study of the apocalypfe and some other pro'phetic parts of fcripture, fhould have rendered the li
terary reputation of this eminent divine lefs con: fpicuous 29.'
a8 In the year 1720
9 See an Address delivered to the Clergy of the Deaneries of Richmond, Catrick, and Boroughbridge, at the Vifitation held in 1792. By Thomas Zouch, A. M. Rector of Wycliffe, Yorkshire. The long passage given above is mken from a note, which the Author of the Address has annexed to it.
ON A PROPHECY THOUGHT TO RELATE TO THE FRENCH REVOLUTION.
HAT the book of Revelation is involved in no small degree of obscurity was stated in the fourth chapter. In addition to this statement it may be observed, that the fources of this obfcurity are numerous1; and that par
See Hurd's xiith Disc. vol. II. p. 98–105.
ticular difficulties are at prefent invincible. Indeed, when difficulties are capable of being furmounted, their removal is often to be effected only by the labours of many fucceffive commentators, and perhaps long after the completion of the event foretold. Thus, for instance, however we may explain the account of the witnesses in ch. xi. of St. John, some difficulties may probably, after all, remain unremoved. That explanation, therefore, which has the feweft, is to be preferred3. This it is proper to premise, left the unlearned reader should come to an inquiry of this fort, under the disadvantage of false notions, and should in confequence entertain expectations, which are unreasonable and not to be gratified.
It may here be remarked, that Mr. Fleming is not the only commentator, who has regarded France as being pointed out in the apocalypse; and that the Fourth Vial is not the only paffage of the Chriftian prophet, which is thought to relate to that country. In truth, so many scriptural interpreters have apprehended a Revolution in France to be predicted by the apostle, that I am fearful of exhausting the reader's patience by that enumeration of names, and that crowd of paffages, which I fhall adduce on the subject. It is not to one country that the advocates of this opinion have been confined. It has been maintained in England and Scotland, in Holland and in France: and of those who have favoured it there appears to have been an uninterrupted fucceffion, for above a century and a half. Univerfally will it be
• Particular obfcurities, that may be found remaining in it, ought by ' no means to abate our attention to, nor deprive us of the great advantage ' and confolation to be reaped from, the general drift and defign of it.' Mr. Pyle on the Rev. Pref. p. 12,
3 In the interpretations of the apocalypse, says Mr. Lowman, we are 'not to expect demonstrations, or such proofs as shall be liable to no
manner of objections.' Pref. p. 27.