<2r>

For Iosephus tells us that {C}h Herod reigned from the time \{34} 34 years/ after he slew Antigonus \&/ 3{6} but \years & 37 years/ after he obteined ye Kingdom by of the Romans. Now he slew Antigonus & \when he/ took Ierusalem at ye that is \in/ |in| in ye \the th/ Sabbattical y I. {P.} in summer Iune, {in I. P.} 4677 \I. P. 4677/, in ye sap|b|batical year, {illeg} |in the 185t Olympiad,| in ye Consulship of Agrippa & Gallus in the sabbatical year, \in the 3d month in the fast/ (as Iosephus relates) {illeg} that is in Iune I. P. 4677 & he was made king by the Romans three years before, & in ye Consulship of Calvinus & Pollio, & 184th Olypiad {sic} (as Iosephus \also/ relates) & by consequence in the I. P. 4674 before midsummer.|,| Now I. P. 4674. Now he died on ye 7th day of the month Cisleu, (as ye the Iews note t|i|n their Calendar, lately printed at Oxford|,|,|)| that is |in| about the end of \November or/ December|.|, & his death was preceded b He fell sick before an eclips of ye moon wch happened a little before ye Passover, & during his sickness went to the bath, i{n}|m|prisoned ye nobles of ye Iews, |&| burnt ye Phri|a|ri|e|ses & then died;|.| Now this eclips happened \All this he did/ not between ye Eclips & ye Passover ,|(| Iosephus affirms not that) but all in \before/ ye winter following. Now this eclips fell on March 13, I. P. 4710, as Astronomers compute. And therefore Herod reigned died either in ye m|w|inter following when he had reigned 37 yeas|r|s \incomples {sic}/ from ye death of Antigonus & 34 from ye death of taking |of| Ierusalem {illeg}|o|r in the {ne} winter after that when those years were more then complete, wth besides some months over.

The first ope of these two cases if|s| favoured by these arguments. First \Thirdly/ Archelaus the \Son &/ Successor of Herod in Iudæa reigned nine years & in the 10th \(saith Iosephus Anti{q}. l. 17. c. 11 .|&| Excid. l. 2. c. 11/ was banished into Gallia {&} {&} & he was banished saith Dio in ye consulship of Lepidus & Arruncius, \that is/ I. P. 4719. If he was banished in ye end of this year his banishment might fall in ye begenning of his 10th year. Whence he|is| \reign/ could not begin later then I. P. 4710. Secondly \Lastly/ Philip the son of Herod (saith Iosephus \Antiq. l. 18, c. 6/) reigned 37 years & died in ye 20th year of Tiberius, that is, I. P. 4747, before September. If the \Subduct/ 37 years were incomplete they & ye beginning of his reign may fall on November I.P 4710 but not on ye November following. Thirdly \Secondly/ Archelaus ye son of Herod newly dead, after he had quieted a sedition in ye feast of ye Passover, went to Rome to get his Father's last will & the Kingdom confirmed to him by the consent of Augustus; & there saw Caius Cæsar the nephew of Augustus sitting in ye first place in Council \(Ioseph. Antiu. l. 17{illeg}, c. 11)/ & Caius yet its certain by Roman history that Caius went from Rome before ye end of the Iul I. P. 4711, & never returned thither any more. First Iosephus puts ye death of Herod not long after ye eclips, & before ye passover of ye next year there was no eclips to shorten the time for him to reccon from.

The second case may seem to be favoured by these arguments Io First Iosephus \Some would have Ioseph/ \Some contend but not fairly that Iosephus is inconsistent wth with {sic} himself where he/ tells us that Antipater the father of Herod assisted <2v> I. Cæsar in his war in Egypt & thereupon was made Procurator of Iude{a} by Cæsar, & made his son \Herod/ Prefect of Galile: at wch time his s|Herod|on \saith Iosephus/ was very young, being but 15 or (as others read) 25 years old. The war in Egypt was in ye end of I autumn I. {illeg} ye en autumn I. P. 4666, & Herod died \saith Iosephus about/ 70 years ye 70th year of his age. [Subduct 25 from 70 & the residue {illeg} 45 add to 4666 & the death of Herod will fall upon ye in \in the end of/ I. P 4711. Yet if] Suppose now that Herod was 26 aged \full/ 25 years complete \old/ & some months over \more/ when he was made p|P|refect of Galile, & de|i|ed when he as many months were run of this|e| 70th year of his age & the difference will be {3}|4|4 years. Add these to I. P. 4666 & the life of Herod will end in|wth| I. P. 4710 as above. So you see Iosephus is in all things very consistent wth \consonant to/ himself.

The birth of Christ therefore \being in the days of Herod/ if it was upon the 25t of Ianuary, fell upon ye end of I. P. 4709, or \(because that was but a {fan{s}{t|c|}y) &} conjecture)/ if wth some Christian{s} who were ancienter the|n| Clemens Alexandrinus \(Strom. l. 1)/ you place it in ye spring \May or the end of April 20 or 21 or May/ (for that was a more likely time \{for} the Iews to travell to Ierusalem to be taxed/ |&| for Shepherds to watch their flocks all night in ye feilds & for ye Virgin Mary \in child birth/ & her new born son to be|lod|ge in a stable wthout a fire) it fell upon in neare ye beginning \middle/ of I. P. 4710, almost four years \three years & a half/ before ye vulgar account. |✱ The wisemen – –| < insertion from the bottom of the page >        ✱ The {s} {Luk} The birth of Christ {I} \may be/ placed in summer because Luke tells us that when the] \{I} ✱ The wisemen came while Ioseph & Mary were yet \in a journey/ at Nazareth {to a str} strange city \in a journey in a journey/ & by consequence before Mary was well enough to return home. The slaughter of ye infants agrees /best\ wth the time of Herods sickness wherein he exercised his greatest cruelties./ Luke tells us that we|h|en the days of the purification \|of the virg|of|in| Mary/ wer (that is ye 40 days after Christs bit|r|th) were ended, & t|s|he|e| ceremonies of the law at the end of that time were fulfilled & Ioseph at ye end of that time had performed all things according to ye law, they returned into Galile|e| to their own city Nazareth, Luc 3|2|.39. This returning to Nazareth was not till after ye death of Herod & therefore the birth of Christ was but a few little before He{os}|rod|'s death. For the \intermediate/ journey of Ioseph into Egypt was so short that Luke passes it over Matthew th|e|lls us that they went first into Egypt till Herod was dead & then returned into Galilee Nazareth: but it seems ye journey into Egypt was so short that Luke reccons it not. And for this reason I \would/ place the birth of Christ but a little before \not only in the last year of Herod's reign but even within a few months of/ Herod's death; suppose in the summer before. < text from f 2v resumes >

The chief objection against this opinion is that it makes Christ 32 years old \at least/ {or}{on} when he was baptized, contrary to ye Gospel of Luke. But ye answer is easy. For Luke s|d|oth not say that Christ was then 30 years old, but about 30 years od|l|d. He de|o|es not tell you his age accurately, but puts in in ye nearest round number.

<3r>

Out of ye|this| kingdom of Asia the northern arose the kingdom of Pergamus wch at first was a very little one then by the assistance of the Romans took almost all \the greatest part of/ Asia minor from Antiochus magnus king of Syria, afterwards ast|s|isted the Romans in conquering Perseus, & then by ye last will & testament of Attalus its king was inherited by the Romans, & in their power & conduct became mighty & extended it self eastward southward into Egypt & eastward into Syria & Palestine, & in the reign of |in the reign of Tiberius put ye messiah to death & in that of| Vespasian took away they daily sacrifice of ye Iews & cast down their sanctuary {&c} |& persecuted the Christians & at lēgth separated from the Romans & became the Greek empire seat at Constantinople.| And this answers to ye little horn which in the latter time of ye kingdom of the four horns was to come out of one of them & were exceeding great to be mighty but not by his own power & wax exceeding great towards the south & towards the east & towards ye pleasand|t| land, & magnify himself \waxed great/ |even| to ye Prince of ye Host &|o|f heaven \& to ye Prince of ye host/ & cast down take away the daily sacrifice & cast \& cast down the stars & magnified himself to ye Prince of ye host & cast/ down ye place of his sanctuary, & practise & prosper destroy the holy people & prosper & practise, & stand up against the Prince of Princes.

This Empire being monarchical & of long continuance & conten|in|ing justly \precisely/ the whole body of ye Goat, deserves|d| as much to be repre{h}|s|ented by the last horn of the Goat as the kingdom of Alexander did to be represented by the first great horn |wch grew| between ye Goats eyes. While The Goat \This/ Prophesy was for many days \at least 230/ {reah|c|hes} to ye time of at least 2300 that is for so many years: it reaches to the time of ye end & the Goat is still in being as are all Daniels Beasts & to this day it signifies the nations of the Greek Empire. And therefore that empire while in a monarchical form was a horn of ye Goat & a very the most considerable of all the horns & there is nothing butut|ee|n as was ye Goats last horn & there is nothing but that horn to represent it \& so ought to be represented. \& aso was the Goats last horn./ It answers exactly to the last |yt| horn of the Goat & there is nothing but that horn to represent it./ & ought not to want a representation & there is nothing but that horn to represent it. If

If you think it improper to represent the nations of ye Greek Empire by a dist \distinct/ horn i{r}{s}|n| ye time of ye Roman Empire \their subjection to ye Romans/, you are to consider that horns signify |are not limited to monarchies but signify| kingdoms as well united as distinct. signify not only single monarchies but also several kingdoms united under one monarch. \kingdoms as well united under one common monarch as separate under several monarchs./ So the two horns of the Ram signify the kingdoms of Media & Persia under one \common/ king & the {two}{ten} horns wester eastern & Northern horn of ye Ram \Goat/ signify ye kingdoms of Syria & Asia as well \sometimes/ under one monarch as \king sometimes/ under several. {illeg} The Goat signifies the four headed kingdom of ye Greeks as well \{illeg}/ united to ye Romans as separate from them: & when ye Goat signifies that kingdō its not improper to represent it also by th a horn of ye Goat. The Romans when they inherited the kingdom of Pergamus did not breake of or destroy a horn of the Goat but possest it. \By the last will & testament of Attalus/ They succeeded Attalus /him\ in ye throne of his kingdom & re{a}|i|gned in his stead. {illeg} \They were/ king of Pergamus till they lost that kingdom by the separation of ye Greek Empire from the Latin. So far was the union of the Greeks & Latins from being an objection that it was nec{ess}ary to make good the Prophesy, concerning this horn. For Daniel saith that it should be mighty but not by its own power. Which is as much as to say that in the time of its greatness it should be mighty but not be by \its/ conjunction wth \of/ \wth/ another power greater then \superior to/ its own. not act apart by its own power but be mighty by another power superior to its own.

Pharamond succeeded Theodemer & soon after had seats granted to his nation neare the Rhene. And now the Barbarians were all quieted & setled in several kingdoms {within} the Empire not only by conquest but also by the <3v> grants of ye Emperor \Honorius/. For Rutilius in his Itinerary written in autum anno Vrbis 1169 that is according to Varros computation then in {V} use A. C 416 \\when he had/ first/ /thus\ lamenti|e||s|n|d|g ye &c late desolations of ye countries of Gallia in this verse

Illa quidem longis nimium deformia bellis. then adds

Iam tempus laceris post longa incendia fundis

Vel pastorales ædificare casas. And a little after

Æternum tibi Rhenus aret —

And Orosius in ye end of his history wch was finished A. C. 417 expresses th{e|is||e|} \represents a general/ pacification of ye barbarous nations by ye words comprimere coangustare addicere gentes immanissimas terming them Imperio addictas because they had obteined seats in ye I|E|mpire by |leage &| compact & coangustatas because \they did no longer invade all reions {sic} at pleasure but/ by ye same league|,| & compact they were peaceably restrained \remained quiet/ /& compact remained quiet\ witin {sic} the \{Em}/ seats granted them.

Thus was the western Empire by various wars of {illeg} \6/ or {illeg} \8/ years continuance divided into various \ten/ \many/ kingdoms & those kingdoms setled in peace in their several in seats granted them by the

Now by the wars above described the western Empire was broken into the ten {fo}|ki|ngdoms following.

1 The kingdom of ye{1 Vandals
2                   2 Suevians
3                   3 Alans in Spain
4                   5 All|a|ns in France
5      The kingdoms of |ye|6 Burgundians
6                   8 Brittains
7                   7 Franks
8                   4 Visigoths
9                   8 Hunns
10 The kingdom of ye10 Romans

Eight of these kings|d|oms are thus mentioned by Sigonius 1 Honorio regnante, in Pannoniā 2 Hunni in Hispaniam 3 Vandali 4 Alani 5 Suevi et 6 Gothi, in Galliam 7 Alani 8 Burgundionus & 6 Gothi certis sedibus permissis accepti. Add ye Franks & Britains & you have ye tenn. But let us view them severally.

1 The kings of ye Vandals were A. C. 408 Gunderic ye successor of Godgilus, 426 Geiseric 477 Hun{a}|e|ric 484 Gundemund. 496 Thrasamund. 523 Hilderic 531 Gelimer. Gunderic \A. C. 409/ let them into Spain & Geiseric A. C 427 into Afric & {sic} Gelimer was taken by Belisarius A. C. 533. In Afric they were very potent Their kingdom according stood in Spain & {a}|A|fric together 123 years & 7 months.

2 The Kings of ye Suevians were – – – Bætica & the Carthaginensian Province. This kingdom lasted 177 years & then was subdued by Leovigildus king of ye Visigoths, & made a Province of his kingdom

3 The Kings of ye Alans in Spain were \A. C. 40{8}|9|/ Resplendial & \416/ Ataces \Vtacus or Othacar/. Resplendial began his reign in France A. C. 408 & the next year led his people into Spain. Ataces was slain A. C. 419 {by} \with all|m|ost all his army/ by Vallia king of ye Visigoths. Whereupon they|se| \Alans/ subjected themselves to |Gunderic king of| the Vandals in Bætica, but the next year withdrew \being impatient of subjection/ fell of{f} from him & returned to the Carthaginensian Province & Lusitania where they lived without a kingd \alone/ tributary to ye Romans in a kind of common wealth without a king & about ye year 448 made war upon the Romans in Carpentania & ye Cathaginensian province & wasted their cities but were soon checkt by the \Rechila/ king of the Suevians. Their kingdom while it stood was the most potent in Spain, & after it fell the|ir| people remained where it had stood & \being mixed wth ye Chatti/ gave the name of Cathalo | aunia (\i. e./ Catti-Alania) to ye province wch is still so called, & of Alanqueran to

<4r>

4 t|T|he Kings of ye Visigoths were A. C. 408 Alaric 410 Athaulphus 415 Sergeric 415 Vallia 419 Theoderic 451 Thorismund 452 Theoderic &c Alaric was a suj|b|ject of ye Empire till he came out of Epire. I date his reign from ye time of his rebellion A. C. 408. In the end – – – – – ever since.

5 The Kings of ye Alans in Gallia were Goar Sambida Eocharic Sangibanus, Beurgus &c Vnder Goar they had seats given neare ye Rhene A. C. 412 Vnder Sambida (whom

Vpon this victory of ye Romans, the \Franks &/ rebelling {illeg}|G|alls \who in ye time of Theudemer had be \made war \were in war were {enem}/// united to strengthen themselves: of wch Ordericus Vitalis makes this mention Cum Galli prius contra Romanos rebellassent Franci ijs sociati sunt; et pariter juncti Ferramundum Sunnonis Ducis[1] filium sibi regem præfecerunt. Whence Prosper: Anno 25 Honorij Pharamundus regnat in Francia. This Bucher well refers to the end of ye \year/ 416th {sic} or beginning of ye 17|y|ear 417 dating these years of Honorius from ye death of Valentinian, & argues well that – – – Romans

9 The kings of the Hunns were \A. C. 408/ Octar |&| Rug|i|la \433/ Bleda & Attila. Octar & Rugila were the brothers of Munzuc king of the Huns in Gothia beyond the Danube & Bleda & Attila his sons. The two first Iornandes tells us were kings of the Hunns but not of them all & had the two last for their successors. The founding of this kingdome under the two first A. C. 408 is thus described by Sigonius: Constat quod Gothis ex Illyrico profectis Hunni successerunt at imprimis Pannoniam tenuerunt. Ne enim Honorius viribus ad resistendum – – – memoratur. How Ætius was Hostage first to ye Goths & then to ye Hunns is mentioned \related/ by Frigeridus who when he had mentioned that Theodosius Emperor of ye east sent grievou grievous commands to Iohn who after the death of Honorius in usurped the crown of ye western empire, he subjoyns, Iis permotus Ioannes Ætium id temporis curam palatij gerentem cum ingenti auri pondere ad Chunnos transmisit notos sibi obsidiatûs sui tempore & familiari amicitia devinctos — And a little after: Ætius tribus annis Alaria obses, dehinc Chunnorum, posthæc Carpilionis gener ex Comite domesticorum & Ioannis Cura palatij. Now Bucher shews that Ætius was hostage to Alaric till ye year 410 when Alaric died & to the Hunns between ye years 411 & 415 |& son in law to Carpilio about the year 417 or 418 & Curopalates to Iohn about ye {year} 423| Whence its probable yt ab he became hostage \to the Hunns/ about ye year 413 when Honorius made peace \leagues/ wth almost all b|th|e barbarous nations & granted them seats. Its further manifest out of Prosper that ye Hunns were in quiet possession of Pannonia in ye year 432. For in \ye 1st book of/ Eusebius's Chronicle he writes Anno 10mo post obitum Honorij cum ad {illeg}|C|hunnorum gentem cui tunc Rugi|u|la pre|æ|erat post prœlium cum Bonifacio se Ætius contulisset impetrato auxilio ad Romanorum solum regreditur. And in ye 2d book Ætio & Valerio Coss: Ætius desposita potestate profugus ad Hunnos in Pannonia pervenit quorum amicitia auxilio usus pacem principum interpellatæ potestatis obtinuit. Hereby it is manifest that at this time Rugula reigned over the Hunns in Pannonia & that Pannonia was not now so much accounted within ye soile of ye Empire being \formerly/ granted away to ye Hunns before; & that these were the very same Hunns wth wch Ætius had in the time of his being their \an/ hostage contracted friend <4v> ship: by vertue of wch as he sollicited them before to ye aid of Iohn the Tyrant A. C. 424 so he now he procured their intercession for himself wth the Emperor. Octar died A. C. 430 for Socrates tells us that about that time the Burgundians having been newly vext by the Hunns upon intelligens|c|e of Octars death seing them wthout a leader set upon them suddel|n|ly wth so great success yt 300 Burgundians slew 10000 Of Rugilla's (or as Maximus calls him Rechilla) being k \left now/ king in Pannonia you have heard already. He died A. C. 433 & was succeeded by Bleda as Prosper & Maximus inform us. This Bleda wth his brother Attila were before this time kings of the Hunns beyond ye Danube their father Mun{zu}c's kingdom being divided between them, & now upon they united the kingdom of Pannonia to their own. Whence Paulus Diaconus saith they did Regnum intra Pannonias Daciam gerere. In ye year 441 they began to invade ye Empire afresh adding to the Pannonian forces new & great armies out of Scythia: but this war was presently composed & then Attila seing Bleda inclined to peace slew him A. C. 444, & inherited his dominions & invaded the Empire afresh. And now I suppose it was that he brought ye Ostrogoths over the Rh Danub{e} & set Valamir Theodemir & Videmir captains over them. \At length/ After vari{ous} great wars with the Romans Attila perished A. C. 454 |& his sons quarrelling about sharing his dominions gave occasion to ye Gepides Ostrogoths & other nations who served them to rebell & make war upon them| & the same year the Ostrogoths had seats granted them in Pannonia by the Emperors Marcian & Valentian & soon after \the/ together with the Romans soon after |the death of Attila (as all historians agree)| ejected the Hunns out of Pannonia. This ejection was to the reign of Avitus as is mentioned in ye Chronicum Boiarum & in Sidonius carm. 7 in Avitum wch speaks thus of that Emperor

—Cujus solum amissas post sæcula multa

Pannonias revocavit iter, {j}am {cr}edere promptum est

Quid faciet bell{is.}

The Poet means that by this coming of {Avitus} the {illeg} {ques} of the Hunns yeilded more easily to ye Goths. This was written by Sidonius in the beginning of the reign of Avitus & hi{s re}ign began in ye end of the year 455 {&} lasted not one full year.

{Ior}{nandes} writes tells us D{uodecim}{o anno regni} Valiæ post pene quinqua{ginta annos} invasa Pannonia, Hunni a Romanis & Gothis {expu}lsa sunt. And this {Mar}cellin{us} taking to be {Valia or} Wallis the King of the Visigoths {illeg} this action to ye Consulship of Hierius & Ardabanes wch was {illeg} 427. Whence it should follow that the Hunns invaded & held {illeg} from ye year 378 or 379. But this is a plain mistake for {illeg} that Theodosius left the Empire entire. And we have shewed {o}ut of Prosper that ye Hunns were in quiet possession of Pannonia in {the} year 432. Nor did Vallia king of ye Visigoths reign 12 years. th|H|e be{gan his} {rei}gne in ye end of the year 415 reigned three years & was slain A{. C.} 419{, as} Idatius Isidorus & ye Spanish manuscrip {sic} Chronicles seen by Grotius {testify &} Olympiodorus who produces his history but to ye year 425 sets {down} therein the death of this Visigothic Vallia & conjoyns it also with that {o}{f Co}{nsta}ntius who|i|ch happened A. C. 420. Wherefore the Vallia of Iornandes who {reigned} at least 10 years i{s} some other king. And I take it to be \the name to be written corruptly for/ Valamir king of ye Ostrogoths. {&} For ye action recorded was of ye Ostrogoths expelling \driving/ the Hunns <8r> out of Pannonia & so \it is/ not likely to|h||at| b{illeg} ye Historian would computt|e| ye {o} wo|r|ite \refer/ ye history of ye Ostrogoths to ye years of ye Visigothic kings. This action happened in |in| \A. C. 435/ ye \years years end of the year/ reign of Avitus \A. C. 455/ (wch I take to be ye 12th year of Valamir in Pannonia) & F that year was \& wch was/ almost 50 years after ye year 408 wherein ye \in which/ \invasion of Pannonia by/ |ye| Hunns invaded ye deserted seats of ye Goths in Pannonia A. C. 408 \year 408 in wch ye Hunns invaded Pannonia/.

Yet the Hunns were not fu wholly \so/ ejected; \but that/ they had further struggles \contests wth ye Romans/ till ye head of Denfix ye son of Attila A. C. 469 {Zemann} (in ye Consulship of Zeno & Marcian as Marcelline relates) was carried to Cons|s|tantinople Sigonius tells us that Nor were they yet totaly ejected \the Empire/. For besides their reli|qu|es in Pannonia, Sigonius tells us that when ye Emperors Marcian & Valentinian when they granted Pannonia to ye Goths \(vizt A. C. 454)/, they granted some part of Illyricum to some of ye Hunns & Sarmatans & in ye year 526 – – – – – – – – – – – by contraction Hungary.

<7r>

Stilico t|w|he|o| commanded ye forces of the Latin or Western Emperor designing to gain the Eastern Empire to himself pretended pretended

The Visigoths \to/ who|m| had Theodosius ye great had granted seats in ye Eastern \part of the/ Empire after ye death of ye Emperor \rose up in arms/ made Alaric their king Captain & troubled that part of ye Empire for about five years together & then coming into \advancing towards/ ye western \Empire/ he was \so soundly/ beaten by Stilico ye commander of ye forces of yt western Empire & that Stilico Claudian called ye remainder of his forces tanta ex gente reliquias breves & Prudentius gentem deletam. w|T|hereupon Alaric submitted being so far humbled yt Orosius tells us that he did pro pace optima et quibuscun sedibus suppliciter & simpliciter orare. Not long after Stilico designing to get ye Empire favoured the Goths underhand, for his use, & \& after a while some time/ procured a military prefecture for Alaric & sent him into ye East in ye service of Honorius ye western Emperor, committing some Roman troops to his conduct amongst his g|G|oths & pro{illeg}|m|ising to follow soon after with his own army. His pretence was to recover some regions of Illyricū wch ye Eastern Emperor was accused to detein injuriously from ye western but his secret designe was to make himself Emperor of ye east: for faciliting {sic} of wch he invited a great body of barbarous nations out of Germany & Sarmatia to divert the western empire by an invasion. Whereupon those nations under several kings, the Vandals under Godegise|i|lus, the Alans under & Chatter in two bodies one under Goar the other under Resplendial, the Suevi under Ermeric & the Burgundians under Gundicar in ye end of A. C. 407 arising from their seats in Germany & Sarmatia, first make an impression ruff advance towards ye Rhene \Empire/ ruffle the Franks beyond ye Rhene, {illeg} \&/ on ye last day of n|D|ecember pass ye Rhene at Ments & diffuse themselves into Germania prima & ye adjacent regions & amongst other actions ye Vandals take Trevirs. Then they advanced into Belgium & began to do ye like there ruffle that country. Whereupon the Salian Franks (a German nation whom the Emperors had sometime before recived into ye Empire & placed \as subjects/ in that part of Belgium wch lies between Brabant & ye Rhene) took up arms & made so stout a resistance that they slew almost twenty thousand of ye Vandals \wth their king Godegisilus/ in battel, the rest escaping only by a party of Resplendials Alans wch came timely to their assistance. Then Resplendial seing this disaster & that Goar was fallen away to ye Romans left ye coasts of ye Rhene & together wth ye Suevians & residue of ye Vandals went towards Spain the Franks in ye mean while prosecuting their victory so far as to retake Trevirs, wch after they had plundred they left to ye Romans. The barbarians were at first stopt by ye Pyrenean mountains wch made them diffuse themselves into Aquitain, but the next year they had ye passage betrayed to them & entring Spain 4 Kal Octob. every one conquered there what he could {&} & at length \A. C. 411/ to avoyd wars wth one another they divided their conquests by lot & {y A} & ye Vandals obteined Bætica & part of Gallæcia, the Suevians ye rest of Gallæcia & ye Alans Lusitania & the Carthaginensian province, the Emperor for peace sake confirming them in those seats by grant A. C. 413.

In the mean time the British soldiers allar{u}m'd by ye rumour of these things revolt A. C. 408 & set up Tyrants there, first Marcus whom they slew presently then Gratian whom they slew within 4 four months & lastly Constantine under whom they invaded Gallia (A. C. 408). And Constantine <8r> having possest a good part of Gallia created his son Constans Cæsar & sent him into Spain to order his affairs there: about wch time it was that the barbarian|ous| invaders \nations/ were let into Spain by some of the soldiers of Constans betraying ye Pyrenean passage to them.

\Also/ The Roman Franks also \above mentioned,/ having made Theudemer the Prince of their old royal family king over them began streight after their conquests of ye Vandals to invade their neighbours. The first they set upon were the Galli Galls of Brabant [Galli Ab|r|borici unde Arboric-bant, Brachbant] but meeting wth notable resistance they desired their alliance. And so those Galls falling off from ye Romans, they \two nations/ made an intimate league to be as one people marrying wth one another & conforming to one anothers manners till they became one wthout distinction. Thus by the access of these nations \Galls/ & of the forreign Franc|k|s also who afterward came over the Rhene, the salian kingdom soon grew very great & powerfull{.}{:}

About the same time Stilico's expedition against ye Greek Emperor being stopt by ye order of Honorius, Alaric came out of Epire into Noricū & requested \demanded/ a summ of money for his service. The Senate were inclined to deny him but by Stilico's mediation granted it. b|B|ut after a while Stilico being detected of a traiterous conspiracy wth Alaric & slain {illeg} 10 Kal Sept. A. C. 408, & so Alaric disappointed of his money & reputed an enemy to ye Empire he turned rebel & brake streight into Italy wth his army wch he brought out of Epire & sent to his brother Adaulphus to follow him wth what other forces he had in Pannonia wch were not great but yet not to be despised|.| & \w|T|here/upon this Honorius fearing to be shut up in Rome retired to Ravenna in October A. C. 408 & from that time Ravenna continued to be the seat of ye western Emperors. {T} At the same time the Hunns {as} {which on} rose from their seats in \also invaded/ Pannonia & seizing the deserted seats of ye Goths founded a new kingdom there.

Then Alaric beseiged Rome \almost two years/ & took it A. C. 410, \took it & burnt part of it/ & attempting to pass into Afric was shipwrackt. {T} After wch Honorius made peace wth him

<7v>

7 The kings of the Franks were A. C. 408 Theudemir 447|16| Pharamund 428 Clodio 448 Merovæus 456 Childeric 482 Clodovæus &c Of the four first there is this {illeg} record – – – – covenant. And this I suppose was the cause that Roman writers recconed him the first king – – – – mistaken. You heard above that ye Sali laws were made in this kings reign – – – till they mixed wth the Romans. Also the Preface to the sali laws (written soon after the conversion of ye Franks to ye Christian religion wch that is about 100 or 120 years after the founding of this kingdom) \in ye end on|f| the reign of Merovæus or soon after.)/ speaks {illeg} makes thi|u|s mention|s| of the original of this kingdom \to be by rebellion not by invasion/ Hæc enin|m| gens quae fortis dum esset & robore valida Romanorum jugum durissimum de suis cervicibus excussit pugnando &c. [So then this kingdom was erected by rebellion not by invasion.] Yet some some {sic} from Prospers calling their dominion Francia – – – recovered all

In the last year of Pharamunds reign Ætius took from him a part of his possession in Gallia but his successor Clodio (whom Fredegarius puts the Son of Theudemir & some call Clogio Cloio & Claudius.|)| recovered all recovered by the as invini|tin|g from beyond the Rhene \a/ great body of Franks recovered all & carried on their conquests as far as the r{e}|i|ver Some & then dividing conquests with the trans {k}{illeg} \The forriegn/ Franks wch he had brought they erected \certain/ new kingdoms |of ye Franks| at Colon, Cambray \Cambray/ & some other citi{illeg}|e|s all wch were soon after conquered by Clodoveus who placed his seat at Paris where it has continued ever since And this was ye original of ye prsent kingdom of ye Franks.

The kings of Britain were A. C. 408 Marcus Gratian & Constantine successively, A. C. 425 Vortigern 466 Aurelius Ambrosius the son of Constantine 498 Vther Pendraco 508 Arthur 542 Constantinus, Aurelius Cunanus, Vortiporeus, 561 Malgo or Maglocunus 586 Careticus 613 Cadwallader\n/ 633 Cadwalinus 676 Cadweladrus. The three first were Tyrants who revolted from the Empire. Orosius Prosper & Zosimus connect their revolt wth ye irruption of ye Barbar|i|ans into Gallia as consequent thereto & Prosper (wth whom Zosimus agrees) puts it in the year wch began the day after the irruption. The just time I thus collect Constantine reigned three years (Idat. edit Sirmondi) & was slain ye year after ye sacking of Rome that is A. C. 411 (Oros. Prosp. Marcel. Idat) 14 Kal. Octob. (Marcellin) & therefore must have begun{t} his reign A. C. 408. And further Sozomen joyns Constantines expedition into Gallia wth Arcadius's death or ye times a little after & Orosius l 7 c 40 tells us yt he passed into Gallia continuò ut imperium invasit imperium. The beginning of his reign therefore must be about the time of Arcadius death & this happened A. C. 408 (Sozom. Socr. Marcel. Cassiod Procop. Zosim) May jst (Socrat) Deduct now from hence ye 4 months reign of Gratian & ye short reign of Marcus & you will fall on ye End of ye year 407 or beginning of ye f|y|ear following for ye first defection.

Now though ye reign of these t|T|yrants was but short yet they \{it}/ gave a begining to ye kingdom of Britain & so may be recconed ye 3 first kings especially since ye posterity of Constantine (vizt Aurelius Ambrosius, Vther Pendraco, Arthur, &c) reigned afterwards

<9r>

\|| I know that/

And tho this horn is now commonly interpreted of Antiochus \Epiphanes/ yet antiquity thought otherwise. For Ierome in his commentary on this 8th chapter of Daniel tells us yt many Christians refer this place to Antichirst. Of this number I find Origen cont. Cels. l. 6 Irenæus l. 5. c. 25, Effrem Syrus, Epiphanius. And indeed ye name of Antichrist seems to have been taken \by the Apostles & first Christians/ from this horns standing up against ye Prince of Princes. As for Antiochus, he was no new horn but one of ye many Kings of an old one,|.| He did not wax great towards ye east & towards ye south, & nor grow from a little horn, fr to a great one, but was a great at first as at last. He was so far from growing greater then the four horns that (as ye little horn did) that he was always less & more inconsiderable then most of his Ancestors. {H}{e} was great in no other power then his own. He reigned not in the time of the end, nor in the last end of ye indignatio{n} nor did he prosper in his his {sic} practises against the sanctuary till ye end of his riegn w|b|ut was beaten & baffled by the Iews. And Daniel himself saith that in his plots & designes to do mischief he should not prosper because ye end was not yet Dan. 11.27. He only took away the daily sacrifice F & did not cast down the place of his sanctuary to the grownd as ye kingdom of Pergamus under ye Romans did & as the little horn is said to do, Dan. 8.11. Nor did the pollution of the sanctuary by him continue so much as 2300 natural days or six years & four months. It lasted but three years from the pollution of the Altar 1 Mac. 1.54, & 4.52, & if it be dated from Antiochus his taking away the vessels of the Temple wch was two years before 1 Mac. 1.20, 29 it will be but five years, but if from Iason's apostasy & setting up a place of exercise for ye heathen customes it will be (1 Mac. 1.11, 14 & 2 Mac: 4.9) it will be above eight. For Iason did that above three <10r> years before Antiochus took away the Vessels of the Temple. 2 Mac. 4.23, & 5.15, 16. So then the conditions of this \little/ horn do not at all agree to Antiochus & if he be excluded, the Kingdom of Pergamus to whom they fully agree must necessarily be admitted.

Now the reign of ye Goat is in the prophesy of ye scripture of truth distinguished into three grand \five main/ periods. The first conteins the reign of the Greeks third till the time {illeg} monar reign {o} \Persians & the second that of ye/ Greeks till ye beginning of ye fourth Monarchy, the second conteins \third/ the united reign of ye fourth Monarchy represented by ye iron leggs of Nebuchadnezzars Image & the third conteins \fourth & fift/ the times of ye end in wch the \divided/ feet of ye Image reign. \And this last is/ |And this|e| last is divided into two \parts/ {of} in the last of wch is the {sic} reign of the little horn of ye fourth beast.|

In The first period In \all/ the f During \In all/ the first \second/ period he enumerates the Kings of ye Greeks in order \down to Antiochus Epiphanes/ & then concludes thus. A the period thus. A{b}nd both these Kings hearts shall [the hearts of Antiochus Epiphan & Ptolomy] shall be to do mischief [i. e. against ye Iews] & they shall speak \ca/ lies at one table but it shall not prosper for yet the end shall be at ye time appointed. that is they shall their|y| \shall/ designe \{to do} mischief/ against the Iewi|s|sh religion \but it/ shall not prosper because it|th|ere is yet another period of time before ye time of ye end commence wherein ye attempt of placing ye abomination is to prosper succeed. The second period therefore we may date from that attempt & by consequence from ye victory \contemporary/ conquest of ye Kingdom of Macedon by ye Romans & King of Pergamus together.|,| For from whence ye times of ye fourth Monarchy use to be dated. For wth respect \to/ this conquest it is that Daniel saith {it} bege|i|ns the next period thus And out of him arms shall stand up. How these arms took away the daily sacrifice & cast down ye place of ye sanctuary (as tis said of ye li|t|tle horn,|)| Daniel himself describes in his vision of weeks. And the people of a Prince that shall come, saith he, shall destroy ye city & ye sanctuary — & in half a week he shall cause the sacrifice & oblation to cease {illeg}|&| upon a wing of abominations he shall make it desolate.

<10v>

In this second \third/ period he further describes how the Beast saints are persecuted \& fall/ many days by this heathen \persecuting/ Empire & then at|by| ye conversion thereof to Christianity are he|l|pen wth a little help & the & many coming over from heathenism cleave to them wth flatteries, & therefore those of understanding to distinguish them from ye rest shall fall \again/ till to ye time of ye end because it is yet for a time appointed. This is the end of ye second \third/ period.

In ye third \fourth peri/ he proceeds to describe wch commences wth the division of ye Empire, he proceeds to describe how they their second \new/ fall shall be occasioned by their \new/ setting up of idolatry|.| in the christian Churches Th For s|t|he King, saith he, (that is the Greek Empire{illeg}|)| shall do according to his will (that is in matters of religion \{&} not according to God's will but his own/) & he shall exalt himself & magnify himself above every god & shall \Yea against the God of Gods shall he/ speak marvellous things against ye God of Gods & shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished, (that is till Gods people be made d \disp{are}/ made desolate by setting up this abomination,) for that that is determined shall be done \decreed shall come to pass./ Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers nor the desire of weomen nor (being as to marriage) nor regard any God: for he shall magnify himself above those all. But in his seat he \every thing. And with God he shall {sic}/ shall honour Protectors \{of}/ d Gardians with {a} God \in his seat/, even wth a God whome his fathers knew not shall he honour them wth gold & with silver & wth pretious stones & pleasant \valuable/ things. Thus shall he do in the most strong holds wth a (or Temples) \of ye Guardians./ Wth a strange God whom he [2] shall \hath/ acknowledged, & increase wth glory \he shall multiply them with honours/ & he {f} shall cause them to rule over many & divide ye land for a patrimony. This is shall distrip|b|ute the earth [among them] for a patrimony.

In the fourth \last/ period wch he calls the time of ye end he describes how the Empire of ye Saracens wch he calls ye King of ye south should come against \push at/ the|is| Greek Empire & how ye Empire of ye Turks wch he calls ye king of {{the}{ye}} north should come against him \the s{ar}/ |it| like a whirlwind by sea {&} land & {en}|ov|erflow it by conquest: & how he should also {illeg}dæa wth ye \many/ |ye|[Editorial Note 1] neighbouring countries, excepting e|E|dom & Moab {&} part of Ammon, & how he should also subject \become Lord of/ Egypt {Li}bya & Arabia. All wch is so plain a description of ye {illeg}{l} Empire yt I see not how it can be disputed. The {illeg} first conquered the dominions of the Greeks in {illeg}Asia: then overflowed Syria & Iudea & went thenc {into} Libya & Arabia & continue still possest of all <5r> these countries. But ye regions of {M} Idumea {illeg}|&| Moab continue free & make ye Turks pay tribute for ye passage of their caravans through them.

With the fall of this kingdom are conjoyned the delivery of the Iews, the great tribulation & the resurrection of the dead. And many of them that sleep in the dust saith he of ye earth, saith he shall awake, some to everlasting life & some to shame |&| everlasting shame & contempt: & they that be wise shall shine as ye starrs in the brightness of ye firmament & they that turn many to righteousness as ye stars for ever & ever. – – – But go thy way Daniel for thou shalt rest & stand in thy lot at ye end of the days. Dan. 12. 2, 13. These words can {illeg} be interpreted of nothing but the resurrection in a true littl|e|ral sense, & therefore Daniel's visions of the four Monarchies end here, & his {illeg} tis the day of judgment in a litteral sence wch Daniel describes in his vision of the four Beasts where he tells us that ye Ani|c|ient of days did sit & his throne was like ye fiery flame & ye judgment was set & ye books opened & ye fourth Beast {j} given to ye burning flames Dan. 7.

Now for ye times {f} since the \first act of/ spoiling & profaning the Temple fell in with the \by Antiochus Epiphanes was the first act of that kind & fell in wth ye joynt/ beginning of the \reign of the/ fourth Monarchy & wth the beginning of ye reign of ye little horn of ye Goat as they are considered {be} in Daniel: (for he neglects the former more inconsiderable part of their reign which is \as being/ less considerable & inf interfering wth ye \proper reign of the/ 3|t|hird Monarchy he neglects) & since the last act of setting placing the abomination yt was in the conclusion \end/ of that sharp & lasting controversy ab among ye Greeks about Image-worship; & \that is/ A. C. \wch ended in the year of Christ/ 842 when the Empress Theodora \wth her Son/ called a Council & set up that worship: {I} if we date ye 2300 days from ye first period & ye 1290 days from the last, they \& put years for days: the two numbers/ will end together about ye year \of Christ/ 2132{illeg}. b|B|ut whether the|i|s be ye true computation I do not know, neither do I know whether the time times & half a time must be dated from the year 607 when ye whore of Babylon by ye grant of Phocas began her ecclesiastical reign over <5v> the Beast or {s} from some later period. What God has wrapt up in obscurity that it might not be foreknown would be great rashness for any man to pretend to foreknow. Tis enough if we can understand what is already fulfilled & thereby be \certainly/ convinced yt ye world is governed by providence.

Now the

When the Angel had \thus/ told what was writti|e|n in ye book of ye scripture of truth he bids Daniel shut up ye words & seal ye book till ye time of the end. But at the time of ye end it was to be opened again because he subjoyns yt Many shall run to & from & knowledge shall be encreased. \& the wise shall understand but none of the wicked shall understand/ This book is therefore the same book wth that in ye Apo whose seven seales are opened by the Lamb opens in the Apocalyps. Daniel sealed it & ye Lamb opened|s| it \by degrees untill ye time of the end approach &/ & then many run to & fro & knowledge is encreased, For the two witnesses prophesy out of it in sackcloth {1260} 1260 days prophetick days & then {b} at length ascend up to heaven {o}|i|n a cloud of people & ye gospel is preached to all nations. {Se}{c} {No} Now if ye scripture book {A} book out of wch ye Angel prophesies in ye Apocalyps by|e| Daniels so that bo So then the Apocalyps or Revel or Revelation (as ye word imports) is nothing else but an opening {illeg} \an unsealing/ \an/ opening of the \a re/ last Book of Daniels Prophesies an unsealing{,} an|&| opening, or a revelation of Daniel's prophesies, \Book,/ a revelation of what was shut up in his prophesies, or a commentary upon him. And therefore we may expect to find in Iohn a repetition & distincter \fuller/ declaration of whatever we meet wth in Daniel concerning the fourth Empire. And so it is.

For his fourth Beast is Io is Iohn repeated wth a fuller descrip & more fully described in Iohn's ten horned Beast wth ye whore upon his back. And since this Beast {it} is all one wth Iohn's signifies the western Latin Empire & the Dragon th{e}|a||t| eastern \of the Greeks/ his third Bea{s} third Beast the Leopard or He Goat is repeated in this Dragon. For so Iohn tells you expresly, in saying that Satan has his Throne in Pergamus & dwells there & that the Dragon is that old Serpent <6r> {D} the Devil & Satan. Apoc. 2.13 & 12.9. As ye Dragon that old serpent is ye Devil & Satan & signifies a Kingdom addicted to ye worship of Dæmons: so Goats are the type of Dæmons or Devils worshipped by Idolaters as you may see in the Hebrew text of Levit. 17.7. 2 Chron. 11.15 Isa. 34.14 whence grew a custome of painting Dæmons in the form of Satyrs. And if since {illeg}|i|f a Dragon & a Goat are types of the same kind, both signifying Dæmons & idolatrous kingdoms; well might Iohn represent that kingdom by a Dragon which Daniel did by a Goat, When the D. & call that ye old serpent the Devil & Satan wch deceives The last reign of the Goat wherein he was to place the abomination of desolation could not be more fitly represented then by ye Dragon that old Serpent called ye Devil & Satan who deceives the whole world. When the|i|s Dragon \Devil/ was cast out of heaven he came down amongst the inhabitants of the earth & Sea wth great wrath knowing he had but a short time. Apoc. 12. These inhabitants were God's people because the|i||s| Dragon \Devil/ was not amongst them before & therefore \since he is ye type of idolatry/ he came to place the abomination among them: wch is as much as to say that he is ye last horn of the Goat.

Now these things being fixed, fix all the rest. If|F||or if| the Dragon & Beast be ye Greek & Latin Empires & every kingdom has its Church we must find two churches for these two kingdoms. And therefore since the woman is ye Church of the Beast (for she rides upon him) it remains that the two horned Beast must be the church of the Dragon. For this Beast had two horns like ye Lamb & is called the fals Prophet & therefore was a church & he spake as the Dragon that is in ye|his| \the Dragon's/ language wch was Greek. T

The rise of these two kingdoms wth their churches is described \together/ in ye 12th & 13th chapters of ye Apocalyps. First there is but one kingdom represented by ye Dragon & one church represented by the woman. Then by the rise of ye Beast out of the Sea (yt is out of ye isles of the Sea, as the Iews called these western countries) the Empire becomes divided into the Dragon & Beast, & ye woman at ye <6v> same time flies into from ye face of ye Serpent into the wildes|r|ness where the Beast reigns & so becomes his church, & the two horned Beast rises out of ye earth (as the Iews called ye eastern countries) to represent the Church of ye Dragon.

Their fall is described in the 18th & 19th chapters where the whore is \first/ burnt wth fire & then the Beast & fals Prophet cast into ye lake of fire & the remnant yt is ye eastern nations slain politically slain, by ye & their spirit the Dragon that old serpent called ye Devil & Satan cast into ye bottomless {pit} to descend ad inferos into Hades.

Besides these four, there are the people of God represented by the remnant of the woman's seed left by \which/ the woman \leaves/ in ye Dragon's kingdom & by the two witnesses prophesying in the Beast's. And in understans|d|ing these six things, together wth ye Image of ye Beast (wch is a body representative of a kingdom, such as is a Senate or Council) consist's all the mystery of ye Apocalyps. So \then/ this book is nothing els but a commentary upon Daniel's fou|r|th Beast & He Goat wth their churches true & fals & true.

This prophesy is also distinguished into the same periods of time wth yt of those of Daniel. First the Lamb opens the seven seals during the reign of ye iron leggs of Nebuchadnezzars image, then while ye feet reign ye seven trumpets sound, thr|e|e three last of wch are the time of the{n} end where|in| ye Kings of ye south & north come against \pushes at/ ye King of who does according to his will & ye King of ye north comes against him wth chariots & horsmen & overflows For the army of Locusts \at ye fift Trumpet/ since they|is| \animal/ live|s| only in hot countries, is ye king of ye south. They torment men but kill them not; that is, \to use Daniels language/ they push at ye greek empire but destroy it not: |And| T|t|he army of horme Euphratean hormen who kills the third part of men is ye king of the north; for{t} for he comes against the king of ye south wth {o} of Greece wth/,\ saith Daniel, wth horsmen & overflows his countries. The third part of men is o|t|he \third part/ of ye three parts into wch Iohn distinguishes prophesied of by Daniel, vizt ye Latine Empire, the Greek Empire & ye \rest/ wthout in Media Persian & Babylonian \& ye rest without that is the Persian/ inclu including ye two first Monarchies \four monarchies whereof the two first make one, & the Roman distinguished into \the/ Greek & Latin Empires the other two/ When Iohn had said how the third part of these were killed, Iohn to signif insinuate that these had set up ye abomina <1r> tion, he subjoyns, \wch we{re} not killed/ And the rest of men (that is ye rest of men prophesied of by Iohn, or the rest of ye Roman Empire) yet repented not of the works of their hands that they should not worship Dæmons & idols of gold & silver & brass & stone & wood wch can neither see nor hear nor walk. Mark that.

When I{o}h

Now as the in Daniel the resurrection of ye dead soon \immediately/ follows ye end of ye king of ye north so in|t| does in Iohn. For saith he The second wo is past behold the third wo cometh quickly & then ye last Trumpet sounds |to that war wch puts an end to ye four monarchies| & ye kingdoms of this world become ye kingdoms of Christ & the time of ye dead is come that they should be judged. And as all these things are describ again described in Daniels vision of ye four Beasts where the Ancient of days sits in \a fiery throne in/ judgment & the beast is condemned to ye burning flames & ye Son of man comes in ye clouds that & receives a kingdom yt all nations should obey him: so they are again described in Dan Iohn where the {illeg}{on} Word of God comes \wth his army/ in ye heaven & takes a against ye Beast & fals Prophet & they are cast into ye Lake of fi{rst} fire & I ye saints sit on thrones in|&| judgment is given them & ye dead are raised & reign wth Christ. And \d|t|he description of/ this judgment is again repeated described more fully by God sitting on a great white throne & ye dead standing before him & being judged out of the books. For in this judgment |ye| heaven & earth fly away & therefore it precedes ye new heaven & new earth & new Ierusalem.|,| The & so is the same wth that judgment wherein the Beast is cast into ye lake of fire, that is the same wth ye|yt| judgment in Daniel \wherein the Beast is cast into ye burning flames./. For it precedes the new Ierusalem is said to come down out of heaven as a Bride pre Bride prepared for her husband & therefore it comes down is the lambs wife who had made herself ready & precedes th before the marriage supper \Ap{o}/ & precedes its coming down precedes that supper & & therefore came down before that supper & by consequence before ye the {sic} beast {casts} \was/ cast into ye lake of fire \&/ when all ye fows|l|s of heaven a|we|re filled wth the flesh of the slain at the supper of the great God, Apoc. 19. This judgmt therefore comprehends the time both of the first resurrection

<11r>

Af that if from ye 7th year of Artaxerxes Longimanus when Ezra came to Ierusalem wth a commission to set up a govenmt {sic} whereby the Iews became a people & a holy city, unto \(wch was in ye year of Nabon. 290 |or 291| we count 7{0}{9} weeks of years, they will end at/ the death of Christ whereby a reconciliation was made for iniquity & the most Holy was annointed|.| were And if from the 2{9}|8|th |d|ay of the month Elul in the 28th year of the same Artaxerxes

Seventy weeks are al{t}{illeg} determined | decided upon thy people & upon thy holy city to seal up \finish blot out/ transgression & to seal up sins & to make a reconciliation for iniquity & to bring in everlasting righteousness & to accomplish the vision & the prophesy & to annoint the most {t} Holy [to be \your/ Prince.]

Know also & understand that \[at the end of your captivity]/ from ye going forth of the commandment to restore \return [from captivity]/ \cause [yor captivity] to return/ & to be|u|ild Ierusalem unto [the coming of] the Annointed [to be] the \your/|]| Prince shall be seven weeks.

Also threescore & two weeks &c – – – troublesome times [during your captivity.]
wch after his rising up & overcoming \|becoming potent by| rooting up/ three of the first kings & thereby establishin \horns were to be/ given into his hands for a time & times & 12 a time

<11v>

{illeg}t: Master
{illeg} Mint
{illeg}

[1] Apud Bucherū (14 c. 9. n. 8)

[2] ✝ Heb. Hath made strange.

[Editorial Note 1] It is not clear whether he added "ye" before or after crossing out "many"; it's possible that at one point he used "ye many".

© 2024 The Newton Project

Professor Rob Iliffe
Director, AHRC Newton Papers Project

Scott Mandelbrote,
Fellow & Perne librarian, Peterhouse, Cambridge

Faculty of History, George Street, Oxford, OX1 2RL - newtonproject@history.ox.ac.uk

Privacy Statement

  • University of Oxford
  • Arts and Humanities Research Council
  • JISC