Draft sections of the 'Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended' and of a treatise on Daniel: section c

1. Of the History of the Iews in the reign of Cyrus Cambyses. & Darius Hystaspis

This history is conteined partly in the three first chapters of the book of Ezra & first five verses of the 4^th & partly in the book of Nehemiah from the 5^t vers of the 7^th chapter to the 9^th verse of the 12^th For Nehemiah copied all this out of the Chronicles of the Iews as may appear by reading the place & considering that the Priests & Levites who sealed the covenant in the 24^th day of the seventh month were the very same which those who returned from captivity in the first year of Cyrus & that all those who returned sealed it This you will perceive by the following comparison of their names.

The Levites Kadmiel & Hodaviah or Iudah here mentioned, are recconed chief fathers among the people who returned with Zerubbabel (Ezra 2.40) & they assisted as well in laying the foundation of the Temple (Ezra 3.9) as in reading of the Law & making & sealing the Covenant Nehem 8.7 & 9.5 & 10.9, 10.

<1v>

Comparing therefore the books of Ezra & Nehemiah, the history of the Iews under Cyrus Cambyses & Darius Hystaspis will be that they returned from Captivity under Zerubbabel in the first year of Cyrus with the holy vessels & a commission to build the Temple & came to Ierusalem & Iudah every one to his City & dwelt in their cities till the seventh month & then coming to Ierusalem they first built the Altar & on the 1^st day of the 7^th month began to offer the dayly burnt offerings & read in the book of the law & they kept the feast of Tabernacles & on the 24^th day of this month they kept a solemn fast & sealed a covenant & thenceforward the Rulers of the people dwelt at Ierusalem & the rest of the people cast lots to dwell one in ten at Ierusalem & the rest in the cities of Iudah & in the second year of their coming in the 2^d month they laid the foundation of the Temple, but the the adversaries of Iudah troubled them in building & hired counsellours against them all the days of Cyrus & [ afterwards, viz^t the reign of Cambyses] untill the reign of Darius king of Persia. 2. Of the History of the Iews in the reign of Darius Hystaspis. But in the second year of his reign by the prophesying of Haggai & Zechariah they returned to the work & by the help of a new Decree from Darius finished it on the 3^d day of the month Adar in the sixt year of his reign & kept the Dedication which joy & the Passover & Feast of unleavened bread.

Now this Darius was not Darius Nothus but Darius Hystaspis as I gather by considering that the second year of this Darius was the 70^th of the desolation of the City (Zech. 1.12 & 7.5) which is true of Darius Hystaspis & that at that time there were men living who had seen the first Temple (Haggai 2.3) whereas the second year of Darius Nothus was 167 years after the desolation of the City. And further if the finishing of the Temple be deferred to the sixt year of Darius Nothus, Ieshua & Zerubbabel must have been the one High Priest the other Capitain of the people for 112 years together, besides their ages before; which is surely too long. For in the first year of Cyrus the chief Priests were Seraiah, Ieremiah, Ezra, Amariah, Malluch, Shechaniah, Rehum, Meremoth, Iddo, Genetho, Abijah, Miamin, Maadiah, Bilgah, Shemajah, Iojarib, Iedaiah, Sallu, Amock, Hilkiah, Iedaiah. These were Priests in the days of Ieshua, and the eldest sons of them all (Merajah the son of Serajah, Hanamiah the son of Ieremiah Meshullam the son of Ezra &c) were chief Priests in the days of Iojakim the son of Ieshua (Nehem 12) & therefore the High Priesthood of Ieshua was but of an ordinary length.

2 Of the History of the Iews in the reign of Xerxes & Artaxerxes Longimanus.

I place the Histories of Ezra & Nehemiah in the reign of this Artaxerxes not in that of Artaxerxes Mnemon. For during all the Persian Mo
narchy there were six High Priests in continuall succession of father & son namely Ieshua, Iojakim, Eliasib, Iojada, Ionathan, Iaddua, & if by an equal division of the times of their Priesthood there be allotted about 34 years to each, so that all together may take up the whole time of that Monarchy which stood 200 years the High Priesthood of Eliasib & by consequence the days of Ezra & Nehemiah will fall in with the reign of the first Artaxerxes. For Ezra & Nehemiah flouished in the High Priesthoods of Iojakim & Eliasib Nehem 3.1 & 12.26 & 13.28 But if Eliasib & Nehemiah be placed in the reign of the second Artaxerxes, since they lived beyond the 32^th year of that King (Nehem 13.28) there must be at least 157 years allotted to the three first High Priests <2r> and but 43 to the five last, a division too unequal. For the High-Priesthoods of Ieshua Iojakim & Eliasib were but of an ordinary length, that of Ieshua fell in with one generation of the chief Priests & that of Iojakim with the next generation (as we have shewed already) & that of Eliasib fell in with the third generation. For at the dedication of the wall Zechariah the son of Ionathan the son of Shemaiah was one of the Priests (Nehem 12.35) & Ionathan & his father Shemaiah were contemporaries to Iojakim & his father Ieshua (Nehem. 12.6, 18.) I observe further that in the first year of Cyrus Ieshua & Bani or Binnui were chief fathers of the Levites (Nehem 8.10 & Ezra 2.4 & 3.9) & that Iozabad the son of Ieshua & Noadiah the son of Binnui were chief Levites in the seventh year of Artaxerxes when Ezra came to Ierusalem (Ezra 8.33) so that this Artaxerxes began his reign before the end of the second generation. And that he reigned in the time of the third generation is confirmed by two instances more. For Meshullam the son of Berechiah the son of Meshezabeel & Azariah the son of Maasejah the son of Anamiah were fathers of their houses at the repairing of the wall (Nehem 3.4, 23) & their Grandfathers Meshezabeel & Hananiah subscribed the covenant in the reign of Cyrus Nehem 10.21, 23. Yea Nehemiah himself this same Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah was then Tirshatha & subscribed it (Nehem. 10.1 & 8.9 & Ezra 2.2, 63) & therefore in the 32^th year of Artaxerxes Longimanus was above 120 years old & if you produce his age to the 32^th of Artaxerxes Mnemon he will be above 180 years old, an age surely too great. The same may be said of Ezra if he was that Priest & Scribe who read the Law Nehem 8. For he is the son of Serajah the son of Azariah the son of Hilkiah the son of Shallum &c (Ezra 7.1) & this Serajah went into captivity at the burning of the Temple & was there slain (1 Chron. 6.14 & 2 King. 25.18) & from his death to the 20^th year of Artaxerxes Mnemon is above 200 years, an age too great.

I consider further that Ezra (chap. 4) names Cyrus, *, Darius, Achswerus & Artaxerxes in continual order as successors to one another & these names agree to Cyrus, *, Darius Hystaspis, Xerxes & Artaxerxes Longimanus & to no other Persian Kings. Some here take this Artaxerxes to be not the successor but the predecessor of Darius Hystaspis, not considering that in his reign the Iews were busy in building the City & the wall (Ezra 4.12) & by consequence had finished the Temple before. Ezra describes first how the people of the land hindred the building of the Temple all the days of Cyrus & further till the reign of Darius & after the Temple was <2v> built how they hindred the building of the city in the reign of Achswerus & Artaxerxes & then returns back to the story of the Temple in the reign of Cyrus & Darius. And this is confirmed by comparing the book of Ezra which the first book of Esdras. For if in the book of Ezra you omit the story of Achswerus & Artaxerxes & in that of Esdras you omit the same story of Artaxerxes & that of the three wise men the two Books will agree so that the book of Esdras (if you except the story of the three wise men) was originally copied from writings of good authority. Now the story of Artaxerxes which (which that of Ahaswerus) in the book of Ezra interrupts the story of Darius, does not interrupt it in the book of Ezdras but is there inserted into the story of Cyrus between the first & second chapter of Ezra & all the rest of the story of Cyrus & that of Darius is told in the book of Esdras in continual order whichout any interruption. So that the Darius the in the book of Ezra precedes Achswerus & Artaxerxes & the Darius which in the same book follows them is by the book of Esdras one & the same Darius, & I take the book of Esdras to be the best interpreter of the book of Ezra. So then the Darius mentioned between Cyrus & Achsuerus is Darius Hystaspis & therefore Achswerus & Artaxerxes who succeed him are Xerxes & Artaxerxes Longimanus & the Iews who came up from Artaxerxes to Ierusalem & began to build the city & the wall Ezra 4.13 are Ezra which his companions. Which being understood the history of the Iews in the reign of those Kings will be as follows.

After the Temple was built & Darius was dead the enemies of the Iews in the beginning of the reign of his successor Achswerus or Xerxes wrote unto him an accusation against them (Ezra 4.6) but in the seventh year of his successor Artaxerxes Ezra & his companions went up from Babylon which offerings & Vessels for the Temple & power to bestow on it out of the Kings Treasure what should be requisite (Ezra 7.) Whence the Temple is said to be finished according to the commandment of Cyrus & Darius & Artaxerxes King of Persia (Ezra 6.14) Their commission was also to set Magistrates & Iudges over the land & thereby becoming a new Body Politick they were encouraged to attempt the rebuilding of Ierusalem & its wall. And thence Ezra saith in his prayer that God had extended mercy to them in the sight of the Kings of Persia & given them a reviving to set up the house of their God, & to repair the desolation thereof & to give them a wall in Iudah & in Ierusalem. (Ezra 9.9.) But when they had begun to repair the wall their enemies wrote &c But the enemies wrote against them to Artaxerxes Be it known, say they, unto the King that the Iews the came up from thee to us are come into Ierusalem building the rebellious & the bad City & have set up the walls thereof & joyned the foundations &c And the King wrote back that the Iews should cease & the City not be built untill another commandment should be given from him, whereupon their enemies went up to Ierusalem & made them cease by force & power (Ezra 4.) But in the 20^th year of the King Nehemiah hearing that the Iews were in great affliction & distress & that the wall of Ierusalem (that wall (which had been newly repaired) was broken down & the gates thereof burnt which fire he obteined leave of the King to go & build the City & the Governours house (Nehem 1.3 & 2.6, 8, 17) but after he had built the wall the people in the City were but few & the houses were unbuilt (Nehem. 7.1, 4) And In this condition he left Ierusalem in the 32^th year of the King & after some time returning back reformed such abuses as had been committed in his absence (Nehem 13.) And here ends the sacred history of the Iews except that in the original manuscript of the Chronicles the Genealogy of the Priests & Levites was recorded till about the end of the Persian Monarchy (Nehem 12.22, 23

Chap
Of the sacred history of the Persian Empire.

^[1] This history is described in the books of Ezra & Nehemiah & to adjust it which prophane history has perplext learned men. I shall not stand to recite other men's opinions but propose as shortly as I can what I take to be the truth.

I observe therefore 1^st that Ezra & Nehemiah flourished in the times of one & the same Artaxerxes. For this Ezra the scribe was which Nehemiah at the dedication of the wall of Ierusalem Nehem 12.36.

2. That During all the Persian Monarchy there were six High Priests in a continual succession of father & Son, namely, Ieshua Iojakim, Eliashib, Iojada, Ionathan, Iaddua. That if by an equal division of the times of their priesthood there be allotted about 34 years to each, so that all together may take up the whole time of that monarchy which stood 200 years, the high Priesthood of Eliashib will fall in with the reign of the first Artaxerxes. And that Nehemiah flourished in the High Priesthood of Eliashib, Nehem 3.1 & 13.28. But if Eliasib & Nehemiah be placed in the reign of the 2^d Artaxerxes, since they lived beyond the 32^th year of that king Nehem 13.28) there must be at least 157 years allotted to the three first High Priests & but 43 to the five last, a division too unequal.

3 The times of the three first of these high Priests fell in which the ordinary generations of all the other chief Priests mentioned in Nehem. 12. & so were but of an ordinary length. For in the high-priesthood of Ieshua the chief Priests were Serajeh, Ieremiah, Ezra, Amariah, Malluc or Melicu, Hattush, Shechaniah or Shebaniah, Rehum or Harim, Meremoth, Iddo, Ginnetho, Abijah, Miamin, Maadiah, Bilgah, Shemaiah, &c Nehem. 12.1 And in the high-priesthood of his son Iojakim the chief Priests were their immediate eldest sons, Merajah, Hananiah, Meshullam, Iehohanan, Ionathan, Ioseph, Adna, Helkai, Zechariah, Meshullam, Zichri, * Piltai, Shammua, Iehonathan, &c. This Iehonathan or Ionathan was son of Shemaiah above mentioned And in the high priesthood of Eliashib at the dedication of the wall, Zechariah the son of Ionathan the son of Shemaiah was one of the Priests Nehem. 12.35. So <4r> then these three ages were but ordinary ones & therefore scarce reach beyond the reign of the first Artaxerxes.

4 The reading of the law & sealing the covenant, Nehem. 8, 9, 10, was in the time of the priesthood of the first of these generations. as you may perceive by comparing the names of the Priests & Levites who sealed it, Nehem. 10, which those who returned from the Captivity under Cyrus Nehem. 12 And the feast of Tabernacles then kept was the first feast which they kept after that return Nehem. 8.14. & therefore kept in the first year of the return Ezra 3.4. Now at that time Ieshua & Bani or Binnui were chief fathers of the Levites Nehem 8 & 10 & Ezra 2.40 & 3.9 & Iozabad the son of Ieshua & Noadiah the son of Binnui were chief Levites in the seventh year of Artaxerxes when Ezra came to Ierusalem. Ezra 8.33. This Artaxerxes therefore began his reign before the end of the priesthood of the second generation. And       that he reigned in the time of the third generation is yet confirmed by two instances more. For Meshullam the son of Berechiah the son of Meshezabeel, & Azariah the son of Maasejah the son of Ananiah were fathers of their houses at the repairing of the wall Nehem. 3.4, 23, & their grandfathers Meshezabeel & Hananiah subscribed the Covenant in the reign of Cyrus Nehem 10.21, 23. Yea Nehemiah himself, this same Nehemiah the Son of Hachaliah, was then Tirshatha & subscribed it Nehem 10.1. & 8.9. & Ezra 2.2, 63, & therefore in the 32^th year of Artaxerxes was above 120 years old & if you produce his age to the 32^th year of the 2^d Artaxerxes he will be above 180 years old, an age surely too great. The same may be said of Ezra if he was that Priest & scribe who read the law Nehem 8. For he is the Son of Serajah the son of Azariah the son of Hilkiah the son of Shallum &c Ezra 7.11 & this Saraiah went into captivity at the burning of the Temple & was there slain 1 Chron 6.14 2 Kings. 25. 18. And from his death to the 20^th year of the 2^d Artaxerxes is above 200 years.

<5r>

5. So then it was in the reign of the first Artaxerxes that Ezra & Nehemiah came to Ierusalem & therefore since the second Darius reigned after this Artaxerxes it must be in the reign of the first Darius that the Temple was built. For the second year of Darius in which the foundation was laid, was the seventieth of the captivity (Zech. 1.12 & 7.5) & at that time there were men living who had seen the first Temple (Haggai 2.3) & if the finishing of the Temple be deferred to the 6^t year of the second Darius, Ieshua & Zerubbabel must have been the one High Priest the other Capitain of the people for 112 years together besides their ages before: which surely is too long a time.

6. They that refer these things to the second Darius & second Artaxerxes ground their opinion on the Temples being built in the reigne of the last of the five Persian Kings Cyrus, Darius, Ahasuerus or Xerxes, Artaxerxes, & Darius named in order Ezra 4. And in this I agree which them that Ahasuerus Achswerus or Axerxes is Xerxes but I say that the last Darius is the same which the first. For the letters to Ahasuerus & Artaxerxes there mentioned concern not the building of the Temple but the building of the City after the Temple was finished And Ezra when he had related these letters about the City returns back to the building of the Temple in the reign of the first Darius.

7. Or, to speak what I more suspect, the order of the leaves of the books of Ezra & Nehemiah has been changed since the first writing & these two letters inserted in a wrong place. For these books & the first book of Esdras consist of the same parts of history set together in different orders & the story of the Temple is there continued without the interposition of these letters. I suspect therefore that when Antiochus Epiphanes had burnt the sacred writings & made it death for any man to conceale them & Iudas Maccabeus recollected what he could afterwards find: some of the sacred writings (as the book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel) <6r> {were} lost & others found only in scattered leaves & put together sometimes in a wrong order. For tis agreed that a part of the prophesy of Isaiah is now added to the book of Zacchary. And some suspect that by the like accident some leaves of the book of Iob have been set together in wrong order & that in the book of Samuel the story of Davids playing before Saul to drive away his evil spirit & becoming his Armor bearer & Saul's loving him greatly has been set before the story of Davids killing Goliath when Saul knew him not but asked again & again whose son he was. Certainly the 1^st book of Esdras is made up of the same pieces of history which that of Ezra & Nehemiah but in another order: & no man would have joyned them in a wrong order had the right order been then known. I will not undertake to rectify the sacred books but out of them & the 1^st book of Esdras I will only say how the history of the Persian Empire may be read in continuall order of time.

In order to this

< insertion from f 5v >

In order to this I would distinguish the books of Ezra into severall joynts or parts & then consider how they are to be set together. The first joynt I reccon the first chapter of Ezra, the second the second chapter to the end of the last vers but one, the third to reach thence to the end of the 7^th vers of the third chapter, the fourth thence to the end of the 5^t vers of the 4^th chapter, the fift thence to the end of the 23^d vers of the same chapter the sixt thence to the end of the book, the seventh thence to the last vers but one of the seventh chapter of Nehemiah, the eighth thence to the end of the three next chapters, the ninth thence to the end of the next chapter the 10^th thence to the end of the 12^th chapter & the 11^th thence to the end of the book. For the first & second joynts are found divided from another in Esdras: the second is followed by the 8^th in Nehemiah, but ought to be followed by the ninth: The eighth ought to come in between the third & 4^th, the fift is wanting in Esdras between the 4^th & sixt & between the 10^th & 11^th some leaves seem to have been lost.

Now the history will become continued & clear & consonant to prophane history if the joynts be read in this order, the first, the second, the ninth, the third, the eighth, the fourth, the sixt, the fift, the seventh, the ninth, the eighth the 10^th & 11^th. And this will appear by these three alterations.

First that the ninth joynt ought in point of time to be inserted between the second & third joynts. For-

< text from f 6r resumes >

First then I would insert the 11^th chapter of Nehemiah between the two last verses of the second chapter of Ezra. For it conteins a relation how all the people upon their first return from captivity under Cyrus distributed themselves by lot at Ierusalem to go thence into their several cities where they were found in the beginning of the next article. This I gather partly out of 1 Chron. 9 where this 11^th chapter of Nehemiah is in part repeated & the people at this distribution are said to be the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities 1 Chron 9.2: & partly <6v> by the names of those who were concerned in this distribution. For Akkub & Talmon the chief of the Porters were there & so was Mattaniah the son of Mica the son of Asaph who was over the thanksgiving Nehem 11.17, 19 & these returned from the captivity which Zerubbabel. Ezra 2.42 Nehem. 12.8.

Secondly that the 8^th joynt ought in point of time to be inserted between the 3^d & 4^th joynts. For the reading of the law began the same day which the sacrifices at the first return, as I shewed above For Ezra read the law in the seventh month next after Zerubbabels return Nehem 7.73 & 8.1, 2.

The chief fathers of the Levites who returned which Zerubbabel & stood up to lay the foundations of the Temple were Ieshua Kadmiel & Hodaviah, Hodajah of Iudah Ezra 2.40. & these were chief in explaining the law to the people when Ezra read it & in making the covenant Nehem. 3 & 4. And the Priests & Levites who returned which Zerubbabel sealed it as you may see by the following comparison of their names

Thus you see all the chief Priests & Levites who returned which Zerubbabel ( & some others besides) sealed the covenant & therefore it was made soon after the return, & by consequence the first year because at the revival of the feast of Tabernacles as was shewed above. Nehem 8.14. Ezr. 3.4

The third alteration is to place the fift joynt next after the sixt that is the Letters to Ahashuerus & Artaxerxes at the end of the book of Ezra. For the fourth & sixt joynts are continued in the book of Esdras. & the sixt set before the 4^th, so that it was a fragment which the Collector knew not how to place. By placing it between the 4^th & 6^t the story of building the temple is interrupted by the story of building the city. This was of a later date & therefore is misplaced & ought to come afterwards. In the letter to Artaxerxes there is no mention of building the Temple as there would have been surely, had the Iews been then about that & therefore tis of a later date. The letter represents that the Iews which came up from Artaxerxes were then come to Ierusalem building the rebellious & bad city & had set up the walls thereof & joyned the foundations: & therefore it was writ against Ezra & his companions some time after their coming from the King to Ierusalem upon occasion of their attempting to repaire the City. For these were the only men who came up from this King to do these things. And hence when the enemies of the Iews had by this letter procured the Kings order that the city should not be built till he gave a new commandment & made them cease by force & power, Nehemiah soon after enquiring of the state of the Iews at Ierusalem hears that they were in great affliction & reproach & that the wall of Ierusalem was broken down & the gates burnt which fire This was news to him in the 20^th year of the King & therefore done not many months before by the enemies of Ezra, as above. For these reasons therefore I subjoyn these letters to the story of Ezra as an introduction to the story of Nehemiah.

If you now read over the sacred History according to the order presented by these three alterations, you will find it more eaven & intelligible & agreable to prophane history then <8r> before & to amount only to this, That in the reign of Cyrus when Zerubbabel came which the people to Ierusalem they went thence by lot into their cities till the seventh & then began to sacrifice to heare the law & to keep the feast of Tabernacles. The next year they laid the foundation of the Temple but were hindred from building all the reign of Cyrus & Cambyses till the 2^d year of Darius Hystaspis. Then they finished it in four years. But so soon as their friend Darius was dead their enemies in the beginning of the reign of his son Ahashuerus or Xerxes wrote an accusation against them to the King. So the Iews continued in distress till the seventh year of his son Artaxerxes Longimanus when Ezra by a new degree carryed a new body of Iews from captivity to Ierusalem, adorned the Temple revived the worship, & restored the polity of the nation, but when they had made good progress in building the City & the walls & the work went on fast, their enemies by a new accusation procured the Kings order that the City should not be built till he gave a new commandment, & thereupon they made them cease by armed force & brake down the wall & burnt the gates. But so soon as this came to the ears of Nehemiah, he procured the Kings order for building the City & between the 20^th & 32^th years of that King repaired the walls & took a register of all the people. Afterwards he returned to the king & the people in his absence began to corrupt themselves but before the King's death he came again to Ierusalem & reformed them. And here ends the Iewish history excepting that the genealogy of the Priests & Levites was written in the Register till the end of the Persian Monarchy. But these genealogies being lost & the Iews having no history of the later Kings of Persia, they have made the duration of this Monarchy much shorter then it was.

The history being cleared let us now see how it agrees which the Prophesy of Daniel's weeks.

Seventy weeks are cut out upon thy people & upon thy holy city to finish transgression & to seal up sins & to expiate iniquity & bring in everlasting righteousnes & to seale the vision & the prophesy & to annoint the most Holy. There were two returns from captivity, the first under Zerubbabel the second under Ezra & at the second Ezra by the addition of people he brought which him by reviving the worship at Ierusalem, & by ordaining Magistrates in all the land to judge & govern them according <8v> to the laws of Moses & the King, they became a people or body politick & a holy City. For till they had a polity & government of their own they were neither a people nor a City in the sense of Daniel. And by the death & resurrection of Christ was transgression finished & sins sealed up or absolved & iniquity expiated & everlasting righteousness brought in & this prophesy ended & the most Holy annoynted. And from the first period to the last that is from the year of the Iulian period 4257 to the year 4747 are just 490 years, that is seventy weeks. For Xerxis was slain an 4 Olymp 78 (Sulpitius) Then Artabanus reigned 7 months & Artaxerxes Longimanus began his reign an 1 Olymp 79 (Diodor. l 11. Euseb. Chron.) & his 20^th year fell in which an 4 Olymp 83 (Africanus apud Euseb.) Whence his reign began about the end of Summer or in autumn, An. Per. Iul. 4250 ^✝ < insertion from the left margin of f 8v > ✝ For his 20^th year extended from the ninth month to the first month Nehem 1.1 & 2.1 & from the first to the fift Ezr. 7.7, 8, 9 & therefore his years began in the autumnal half year < text from f 8v resumes > & Ezra's journey in his seventh year being in spring was An. Per. Iul. 4257. The death of Christ is usually referred to the of Christ 33 but I had rather refer it to the year following An. Per. Iul. 4747, this being both the sabbatical year & as Eusebius notes, the year of Iubile. For this affords us a reason why the first Christians had all things common, Act. 2.44, 45.And it was to the manumission of servants & the drawing of water out of the river Siloam in the end of the feast of Tabernacles in the beginning of this sabattical year that Christ alluded to at this Feast when he spake of making servants free & drinking water of life & rivers of this water flowing out of his belly Iohn 7 & 8 when he said: Iohn 7 & 8.

Know also & understand that from the going forth of the commandment to cause to return & to build Ierusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks The former part of the Prophesy related to the first coming of Christ, this being dated to the coming of the Messiah to be Prince. seems to relate to the second. For all Daniel's Prophesies reach to the end of the world & there is scarce a prophesy in the old Testament concerning Christ the does not in something or other relate to his second coming. Nor is it a new opinion to apply some part of this prophesy to that coming. For so did Irenæus l. 5. c. 25. æ also Iulius Africanus the Chronologer, Hippolytus an Arabian Bishop & Apollinaris Bishop of Laodicea as Ierom in his commentary on this place mentions This clause therefore I had rather leave to be explained by time then venture upon a rash interpretation of what I do not yet understand.