Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. John

<1r>

Of the Church.
The Introduction.

When Manasses^[1] set up a carved image in the house of the Lord & built altars in the two courts of the house to all the Host of heaven & used inchantments & witchcraft & familiar spirits & for his great wickedness was invaded by the army of Assarhadon king of Assyria & carried captive to Babylon, the book of the law was lost till the eighteenth year of his grandson Iosiah. Then Hilkiah^[2] the high Priest upon repairing the Temple found it there, & the King lamented that their fathers had not done after the words of the book & commanded that it should be read to the people & caused the people to renew the holy covenant with God. This is the book of the law now extant.

When Sesak^[3] came out of Egypt & spoiled the temple & brought Iudea into subjection to the monarchy of Egypt (w^ch was in fift year of Rehoboam,) the Iews continued under great troubles for about twenty years; being without the true God & without a teaching Priest & without the law; & in those times there was no peace to him that went out nor to him that came in, b{illeg}|u|t great vexations were upon all the inhabitants of the countri{illeg}|e|s, & nation was destroyed of nation, & city of city, for God did vex them with all adversity. But when Sesak^[4] was dead & Egypt fell into troubles, Iudea had quiet ten years & in that time Asa built fenced cities in Iudea & got up an army of {4}|5|80000 men w^th w^ch in the 15^th year of his reign he met & overcame Zerah the Ethiopian who had conquered Egypt & Libya & Troglodytica & came out w^th an army of 1000000 Egyptians & Libyans & Troglodytes & Ethiopians to recover the counties {sic} formerly conquered by Sesak. And after this victory Asa dethroned his mother for idolatry, \& he renewed the altar & brought new vessels of gold & silver into the Temple^[5],/ & he & the people entered into a new covenant to seek the Lord God of their fathers upon pain of death to those who worshipped other Gods; & his son Iehosaphat took away the high places & in the third year of his reign sent some of his princes & of the priests & levites to teach in the cities of Iudah, & they had the book of the law with them, & went about throughout all the cities of Iudah, & taught the people. This is that book of the law w^ch was afterwards lost in the reign of Manasses & found again in the reign of Iosiah, & therefore it was written before the third year of Iehosaphat.

The same book of the law was preserved & handed down to posterity by the Sam{u}|a|ritans in another character & therefore was received by the ten tribes before their captivity. For when the ten tribes were captivated^[6], a Priest of the captivity was sent back to Bethel by order of the king of Assyria to instruct the new inhabitants of Samaria in the manner of the God of the land, & the Samaritans persisted had the Pentateuch from this Prist|es|t as conteining the law or manner of the God of the land w^ch he was to teach them. For they persevered in the religion w^ch he taught them^[7] joyning \accepting that they joyned/ /joyning\ with it the worship of their own Gods, & by persevering in what they had been taught they preserved this book of their law in the original character of the Hebrews, while the two tribes after their return from Babylon changed the character to that of the Chaldees w^ch they had learned at Babylon.

And while the Pentateuch was received as the book of the law both by the <2r> two tribes & by the ten tribes, it follows that they received it before they became divided into two kingdoms. For after the division ther|y|e was received not laws from one another, but continued at variance. Iudah could not reclaim Israel from the sin of Ieroboam & Israel could not bring Iudah to it. The Pentateuch therefore was the book of the Law in the days of David & Solomon. The affairs of the Tabernacle & Temple were ordered by David & Solomon according to the law of this book, & David in y^e 78^th Psalm admonishing the people to give ear to the law of this book God means the law of this book. For in describing how their forefathers kept it not he quotes many \historical/ things out of the books of Exodus & Numbers.

The race of the kings of Edom before there was a \reigned any king/ king {sic} |o|in|ve||r| Israel is set down in the book of Genesis^[8], & therefore that book was not written \entirely in the form now extant/ before the reign of Saul. The writer set down the race of those kings till his own time & therefore wrote before David conquered Edom. The Pentateuch is composed of the Law & the history of Gods people together, & the history hath been collected from several books, such as were the history of the creation composed by Moses (Gen. \Exod/. 20.11.) the book of the generation|s| of Adam (Gen.5) & the book of the wars of the Lord, Num. 21.14. This book of wars conteined what was done at the red sea & a|i|n the journeying of Israel through the wilderness, & therefore was begun by Moses. And Ioshua might carry it on in writing h to the conquest of Canaan. For Ioshua wrote some things in the book of the law of God (Ios. 24.26.) & therefore might write his own wars in the book of wars, those being the principal wars of God. These were publick books & therefore not written without the authority of Moses & Ioshua. And Samuel had leasure in the reign of Saul to put them into the form of the books of Moses & Ioshua now extant |inserting into y^e Book of Genesis, the race of the kings of Edom, until their reigned a king in Israel.|

The book of the Iudges is a continued history of the Iudges down to the death of Sampson & therefore was compiled after his death out of the Acts of the Iudges. Several things are said to be done in this book are said to be done when there was no king in Israel (Iudg. 17.6 & 18.1 & 19.1 & 21.5) & therefore this book was written after the beginning of the reign of Saul. When it was written, the Iebusite dwelt in Ierusalem (Iud. 1.21) & therefore it was written before the seventh \eighth/ year of David 2 Sam. 5.8. & 1 Chron. 11.6. The books of Moses, Ioshua, & Iudges co{t} contein one continued history down from the creation to the death of Sampson. Where the Pentateuch ends the book of Ioshua begins & where the book of Ioshua ends the book of Iudges beginns. And therefore all these books have been composed out of the writings of Moses Ioshua & other records by t|o|ne & the same hand after the beginning of the reign of Saul & before the eighth year of David. And Samuel was a writer sacred writer (1 Sam. 10.25) & acquainted w^th the history of Moses & the Iudges (1 Sam. 12.8, 9, 10, 11, 12) & had leasure in the reign of Saul & sufficient authority to compose these books. He was a prophet, & th{e} Iudged of Israel & \all the days of his life & was/ in the greatest esteem with the people; <3r> & the law by w^ch he was to judge the people was not to be published by less authority then his own \the law-maker being not inferior to the judge/. And the book of Iasher w^ch is quoted in the book of Ioshua (Ios. 10.13) was in being at the death of Saul, 2 Sam. 1.18.

At the dedication of the Temple of Solomon when the Ark was brought into the most Holy, there was nothing in it but the two tables (1 King. 8.9) & therefore when the Philistines took the Ark, they took out of it the Book of the Law & the golden pot of manna & Aarons rod. And this & other losses {illeg} in the desolation of Israel by the conquering Philistims, might give occasion to Samuel, after some respite from those enemies, to recollect the scattered writings of Moses & Ioshua & the Records of the \Patriarchs &/ Iudges & compose them in the form now extant.

The book of Ruth is a history of things done in the days of the Iudges & may be looked upon as an addition to the book of the Iudges written by the same author & at the same time. For it was written after the beginning of the reign of Saul (Ruth 1.1) \birth of David (Ruth IV.17, 22)/ & not long after because the history of Booz \& Ruth/ the great grandfather \& great grandmother/ of David & of Ruth & \his gre{a}/ \that of/ their contemporaries could not well be remembred above two or three generations. And since this book derives the genealogy of David from Booz & Ruth & o{p}|m|its Davids elder brothers & his sons; it was written in honour of David after he was annointed King by Samuel & before he had children in Hebron & by consequence in the reign of Saul. It proceeds not to the history of David & therefore seems to have been written presently after he was annointed. They judge well therefore who ascribe to Samuel the books of Ioshua Iudges & Ruth.

Samuel is also reputed the author of the first book of Samuel till the time of his death. The two books of Samuel cite no authors & therefore seem to be originals. They begin with his genealogy birth & education & therefore might be writ in honour of him by his disciples \the sons of the Prophets of Naioth in Ramah/. Or if he began then his disciples might continue them to the last sickness of David might be writ by himself & his disciples the Prophets at Naioth in Ramah & continued b might be begun by himself & continued by \might be written partly in his life time by himself or his disciples begun/ his disciples the Prophets at Naioth in Ramah (1 Sam. 19. 18, 19, 20) & partly after his death by the same disciples.

The books of the kings cite other authors, as the book of the Acts of Solomon, the book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel & the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Iudah. The books of the Chronicles cite the book of Samuel the Seer, the book of Nathan the prophet, & the book of Gad the Seer, for the acts of David; the book of Nathan the prophet, the prophesy of Ahijah the Seer for \Shilonite &/ the visions of Iddo the Seer for the Acts of Solomon; the book of Shemajah the prophet, & the book of Iddo the Seer concerning gener|a|logies, for the Acts of Rehoboam & Abijah; the book of the kings of Iudah & Israel for the acts of Asa, Iona|as|h, Amaziah, Iotham, Azaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, & Iosiah; the book of Hanani the Seer for the Acts of Iehosaphat; & the visions of Isaiah for the Acts of Vzziah & Hezekiah. ^[9]|[|These books were therefore collected out of the historical writings of the ancient Seers & Prophets. And because the books of the Kings & Chronicles quote one another they were written at one & the same time. And this time was after the return from the Babylonian captivity because they bring down the history of Iudah & the genealogies of the Kings of Iudah & of the high Priests to that captivity. And the book of Ezra was originally a part of the book of the Chronicles & has been divided <4r> from it. For it begins with the two last verses of the book|s| of Chronicles, & the first book of Esdras begins with the two last chapters thereof. Ezra was therefore the compiler of the books of Kings & Chronicles & brought down the history to his own time. He was a ready Scribe in the Law of God, & for assisting him in this work Neemias founded a library & gathered together the Acts of the kings & the Prophets & of David & the Epistles of the Kings concerning the holy gifts, 2 Maccab. 2.13. By the Acts of David I understand here the two books of Samuel or at least the second book. Out of the Acts of the Kings composed \written/ from time to time by the Prophets he composed the books of the Kings of Iudah & Israel, the Chronicles of the Kings of Iudah & the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel. And in doing this he joyned those Acts together in due order of time, copying the very words of the authors, as is manifest from hence that the books of the kings & Chronicles frequently agree with one another in words for many sentences together. Where they agree in sense there they agree in words.

And \So also/ the prophesies of Isaiah written at several times he has collected into one body. And the like for those of Ieremy & the rest of the prophets down to the days of the second Temple The book of Ionah is the history of Ionah written by another hand. The book of Daniel is a collection of papers written at several times. The six last chapters contein prophesies written at several times by Daniel himself: the six first are a collection of pa historical papers written by others. The fourth chapter is a decree of Nebuchadnezzar. The first chapter was written after Daniels death: for the author saith that Daniel continued to the first year of Cyrus; that is to his first year over the Persians & Medes & third year over Babylon. And for the same reason the fift & sixt chapters were also written after his death. For they end with these words: So this Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius & in the reign of Cyrus the Persian. Yet these words might be added by the collector of the papers whom I take to be Ezra.

The Psalms composed by Moses David & others seem to have been \also/ collected by Ezra into one volume. I reccon him the collector because in this collection I meet with Psalms as late as the Babylonian captivity, but with none later.

After these things Antiochus Epiphanes spoiled the Temple commanded the Iews to forsake \the/ law upon pain of death & caused the sacred books to be burnt wherever they could be found, & in these troubles the book of |y^e| Chronicles of the kings of Israel was entirely lost. But upon recovering from this oppression, Iudas Maccabeus gathered together all those writings that were to be met with (2 Maccab. 2.14) & in reducing them into order, part of the prophesies of Isaiah \or some other Prophet/ have been added to the end of the prophesies of Zechary & the book of Ezra has been separated from the book of Chronicles & set together in two different orders; in one order in the book of Ezra received into the Canon & in another order in the first book of Ezdras.

And after the Roman captivity the Iews for preserving their traditions put them in writing in their Talmud, & for preserving their scriptures <5r> agreed upon an edition & pointed it & counted the letters of every sort in every book. And by preserving only this Edition the ancienter various lections, except what can be discovered by means of the Septuagint Version, are now lost, & such marginal notes or other corruptions as by the errors of y^e transcribers before this Edition \was made,/ have crept into the text, are now scarce to be corrected.

The Iews before the Roman captivity, distinguished the sacred books into the Law, the Prophets, & the \Hagiographa or/ Holy writings, & read only the Law & the Prophets in their Synagogues. And Christ & his Apostles laid the stress of religion upon the Law & the Prophets, Matt. 7.12 & 22.4. Luke 16.16, 29, 31, & 24.44. Acts 24.14 & 26.22. Rom. 3.21. By the Hagiographa they me\a/nt the historical books called Ioshua, Iudges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, |&| {illeg}|E|sther, the book of Iob, the Psalms, the book{e}|s| of the Solomon, & the Lamentations. The Samaritans read only the Pentateuch. And when Iehosaphat sent men to teach in y^e cities they had with them only the book of the Law: for the Prophesies now extant were not then written. And upon the return from the Babylonian captivity Ezra read only the book of the Law to the people from morning to noon on the first day of the seventh month & from day to day in the feast of Tabernacles: for he had not yet collected the writings of the Prophets into the form of the books /volume\ now extant \but instituted the reading of them after the collection was made/. By reading the Law & the Prophets in the Synagogues those books have been kept freer from corruption than the Hagiographa.

|②| Amongst the \old/ Prophets Daniel is most distinct in order of time & most easy to be understood. And therefore in those things w^ch relate to the last times he must be made the key to the rest. And in order to understand him I designe in the following discourse to explain some of his types & phrases w^ch relate to the state of the Church in the last ages, & particularly, what is to be understood by \Ancient of days, the son of man, the saints of the most High,/ the Host of heaven, the Prince of the Host, the Prince of Princes, Messiah the Prince, Michael the great Prince of Daniels people, the Holy Covenant, the sanctuary of strength, \those that forsake the holy Covenant/ the Host w^ch was given to y^e last horn of the Goad|t| in transgression against the Holy Covenant, \②/ the desolation of the Host of Heaven \by the transgressors/, the \①/ transgression of desolation or abomination of desolation, \③/ the indignation against the holy Covenant, the last end of the indignation, & the time of the end. For these are general heads of divinity \religion/ \relating to the Church state of the Church/ & may be considered without undertaking to interpret the prophesies.

|②| In the infancy of the nation of Israel when God had given them a law & made a covenant with them to be their God if they would keep his commandments, he sent Prophets to reclaim them as often as they revolted to the worship of other Gods: & upon their returning to him they sometimes renewed the covenant upon oath w^ch they had broken. These prophets he continued to send till the days of Ezra: but after their prophesies were read in the synagogues, those prophesies were thought sufficient. For if the people would not hear Moses & the old Prophets, they would hear no new ones, no not tho they should rise from the dead. At length when a new truth was to be preached to <6r> the Gentiles, namely that Iesus was the Christ, God sent new Prophets & teachers: but after their writings were also received & read in the synagogues of the Christians, prophesy ceased a second time. We have Moses the Prophets & Apostles & the words of Christ himself, & if we will not hear them we shall be more inexcusable then the Iews. For the Prophets \& Apostles/ have foretold that as Israel often revolted & brake the covenant & upon repentance renewed it {illeg}, so there should be a falling away among the Christians \soon after the days of the Apostles/, & that in the latter days God would destroy the impenitent revolters & make a new covenant w^th his people. And the giving ear to the prophets is a fundamental character of the true Church. For God has so ordered the prophesies that t{h} in the time of y^e end \latter days/ the wise may understand but \the wicked shall do wickedly &/ none of the wicked shall understand, Dan. 12.9, 10. The authority of Kings & Emperors is humane & P Emperors Kings & Princes is humane. The authority of Councils, Synods, Bishops & Presbyters is humane. The authority of the Prophets is divine & comprehends the summ of religion, for \recconing/ Moses \& the Apostles/ was|ere| a \among the/ prophets. And if an Angel from heaven preach any other gospel \then what they have delivered/ let him be accursed. Their writings contein the covenant between God & his people, with instructions for keeping this covenant, {illeg} instances of Gods judgments upon them that break it, & predictions of things to come. While the people of God keep the covenant they continue to be his people: when they break it they cease to be his people \people or Church/ & became the synagogue of Satan who say they are Iews & are not. And no power on earth is authorised to alter this covenant.

The predictions of things to come relate to the state of the Church in all ages. And amongst the old Prophets Daniel is most distinct in order of time & easiest to be understood: & therefore in those things w^ch relate to the last times he must be made the key to the rest. And in order to this I designe in the following discourse to explain some of his types & phrases w^ch relate to the religion & state of the Church in the last ages, & particularly what is to be understood by the Ancient of days sitting on a throne, the Son of man coming in the clou{illeg}ds, the people of the saints of the most High, the \1/ Host of Heaven, the \2/ Prince of the Host, the Prince of princes, Messiah the Prince, Michael the great Prince of Daniel's people, the holy \3/ Covenant, the Sanctuary of strength, those that forsake the holy covenant, the Host w^ch was given to the last horn of the Hee-goat in transgression against the holy covenant, the transgression of desolation called also the abomination of desolation, the the {sic} desolation of the Host of heaven by the transgressors, the indignation against the holy covenant, the last end of the indignation, & the time of the end. For these are general heads of religion relating to the state of the Church, & may be considered without undertaking to interpret the prophesies.

<7r>

Chap 1. \2/
Of the prophetic language.

For understanding these prophesies we are in the first place to acquaint our selves with the figurative language of the Prophets. And this language is taken from the analogy between the world natural & an {illeg} empire or kingdom considered as a world politiqꝫ

Accordingly the whole world natural consisting of heaven & earth signifies the whole world politiqꝫ consisting of thrones & people, or so much of it as is considered in the prophesy: & the things in that world signify the analogous things in this. For the heavens & the things therein signify thrones & dignities & those that enjoy them; & the earth with the things therein the inferior people, & the lowest parts of the earth called Hades or Hell, the lowest or most miserable part of the people. Whence ascending towards heaven & descending to the earth are put for rising & falling in power & honour: Rising out of the earth or waters & falling into them, for the rising up to any dignity or dominion out of the in|[|ferior^[10] state of the people or falling down from the same into that inferior state. Descending into the lower parts of the earth for descending to a very low & unhappy estate. Speaking with a faint voice out of the dust for being in a weak & low condition. Moving from one place to another for translation from one office dignity or dominion to another. Great earthquakes & the shaking of heaven & earth for the shaking of kingdoms so as to distract or overthrow them. The creating a new heaven & earth & the passing away of an old one, for or the beginning & end of the world, for the rise & ruin of the body politique signified thereby.

In the heavens the Sun & Moon are by interpreters of dreams put for the persons of {Q}|K|ings & Queens, but in sacred prophesy w^ch regards not single persons, the sun is put for the whole species & race of kings in the kingdom or kingdoms of the world polytic shining with regal power & glory: the Moon for the body of the common people considered as the kings wife: the starrs subordinate Princes & great men, or for Bishops & Rulers of the people of God when the sun is Christ. Light for the glory truth & knowledge wherewith great & good men shine & illuminate others. Darkness for obscurity of condition, & for error blindness & ignorance. Darkning, smiting, or setting of the Sun Moon & Stars|r|s for the ceasing of a kingdom, or for the desolation thereof proportional to the darkness. Darkning the Sun, turning the Moon into blood, & falling of the starrs, for the same. New Moons for the return of a dispersed people into a body politiqꝫ or ecclesiastiqꝫ.

Fire & Meteors refer to both heaven & earth, & signify as follows. Burning any thing with fire is put for the consuming thereof by war. A conflagration there of the earth or turning a country into a lake of fire, for the consumption of a kingdom by war. The being in a furnace for the being in slavery under another nation. The ascending up of the smoak of any burning thing for ever & ever for the continuation of a conquered people under the misery of perpetual subjection & slavery. The scorching heat of the sun for vexations warrs persecutions & troubles inflicted by the king. Riding on the clouds for reigning over much people. Covering the Sun with a cloud or with smoke, for oppression of the king by the armies of an enemy. Tempestuous winds (that is, the motion of clouds) for warrs. Thunder (that is the voyce of a cloud) for the voyce of a multitude. A storm of thunder <8r> lightning hail & overflowing for a tempest of warr descending from the heavens & clouds politiqꝫ on the heads of their enemies. Rain if not immoderate, & dew, & living water, for the graces & doctrines of the spirit. And the defect of rain for spiritual barrenness.

In the earth, the dry land & congregated waters (as a s|S|ea, a River, a Flood) are put for the people of several regions nations & dominions. Embittering of waters for great affliction of the people by war & persecution. Turning things into blood for the mystical death of bodies politiqꝫ, that is for their dissolution. The overflowing of a sea or river for the invasion of the earth politiqꝫ by the people of the waters. Drying up of waters for the conquest of their regions by the earth. Fountains of waters for cities the permanent heads of rivers politiqꝫ. Mountains & Islands for the cities of the earth & sea politiqꝫ with the territories & dominions belonging to those cities. Dens & Rocks of mountains for the Temples of cities. The hiding of men in those Dens & Rocks for the shutting up of Idols in their Temples. Houses & Ships for families assemblies & towns in the earth & sea politiqꝫ. And a navy of war-ships for an army of the kingdom signified by the sea.

Also animals & vegetables are put for the people of several regions & conditions; & particularly, Trees, hearbs, & land animals for the people of the earth politique. Flaggs, reeds & fishes for those of the waters politique. And Birds & Insects for those of the politiqꝫ heaven & earth. A forest for a kingdom. And a wilderness for a desolate & thin people.

If the world politiqꝫ considered in prophesy consists of many kingdoms, they are represented by as many parts of the world natural. As the noblest by the celestial frame, & then the Moon & Clouds are put for the common people. The less noble by the earth sea & rivers, & by the animals or vegetables or buildings therein; & then the greater & more powerfull animals & taller trees are put for kings princes & nobles. And because \the/ whole kingdom is the body politiqꝫ of the king, therefore the Sun, or a Tree, or a Beast, or Bird or a man whereby the king is represented, is put in a large signification for the whole kingdom; & several animals, as a Lion, a Beare, a Leopard, a Goat, according to their qualities, are put for several kingdoms & bodies politique; & sacrificing of Beasts for slaughtering & conquering of kingdoms; & friendship between Beasts for peace between kingdoms. Yet sometimes vegetables & animals are by certain epithites or circumstances extended to other significations; as a Tree when called the tree of life or of knowledge, & a Beast when called the old serpent, or worshipped.

When a Beast or Man is put for a kingdom, his parts & qualities are put for the analogous parts & qualities of the kingdom. As the head of a Beast for the great men who precede & govern. The tail for the inferior people who follow & are governed. The heads, if more then one, for the number of capital parts or dynasties or dominions in the kingdom whether collateral or successive with respect to the civil government. The horns on any head for the number of kingdoms in that head with respect to military power. Seeing for understanding, & the eyes for men of understanding & policy, & in matters of religion for Ἐπί{s}|σ|κοποι Bishops. Speaking for making laws. The mouth for a lawgiver, whether civil or sacred. The loudness of the voice for might & power. The faintness thereof for weakness. Eating & drinking for acquiring what is signified by the things eaten & drunken. The hairs of a beast or man, & the feathers of a bird for people. The wings for the branches of a people spread abroad by con number of kingdoms represented by the beast. The arm of a man for his power or for any people wherein his strength & power consists. His feet for the lowest of the people or for the latter end of the kingdom. The feet nails & teeth of beasts of prey for armies & squadrons of armies. The bones for strength & for fortified places. The flesh for riches & possessions. And the days of their acting for years. And when a tree is put for a kingdom, its branches leaves & fruit signify as do the wings feathers & food of a bird or beast.

When a man is taken in a mystical sense, his qualities are often signified by his actions, & by the circumstances of things about him. So a <9r> Ruler is signified by his riding on a beast: a Warrior & Conqueror by his having a sword & bow: a potent man by his gigantic stature: a Iudge by weights & measures: a sentence of absolution & \or/ condemnation by a white or black stone: a new dignity by a new name: moral or civil qualifications by garments: honour & glory by splendid apparel: royal dignity by purple or scarlet, or by a crown: righteousnes by white & clean robes: wickedness by spotted & filthy garments: affliction mourning & humiliation by cloathing in sackcloth: dishonour shame & want of good works by nakedness: error & misery by drinking a cup of his or her wine that causeth it: propagating any religion for gain by exercising trafick & merchandise with that people whose religion it is: worshipping or serving the false Gods of any nation by committing adultery with their princes, or by worshipping them: a Council of a kingdom by its image: idolatry by blasphemy: overthrow in war by a wound of man or beast: a durable plague of war by a sore & pain: the affliction or persecution w^ch a people suffers in labouring to bring fours|rth| a new kingdom by the pain of a woman in labour to bring forth a manchild: the dissolution of a body politick or ecclesiastick by the death of a man or beast: & the revival of a dissolved dominion by the resurrection of the dead.

Chap. II. \3./
Of the vision of the Image
composed of four metals.

The prophesies of Daniel are all of them related to one another as if they were but several parts of one general prophesy given at several times. The first is the easiest to be understood, & every following prophesy adds something new to the former. The first was given in a dream to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon; \in the second year of his reign;/ but the king forgetting his dream, it was given again to Daniel in a dream & by him revealed to the king. And thereby Daniel presently became famous for wisdome & revealing of secrets: insomuch that Ezekiel his contemporary in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar spake thus of him to the king of Tyre. Behold, saith he, thou art wiser then then {sic} Daniel, there is no secret that they can hide from thee. Ezek XXVIII.3. And {t}he same Ezekiel in another place joyns Daniel with Noah & Iob as most high in the favour of God. Ezek. XIV.14, 16, 18, 20. And in the last year of Belshazzar, the Queen mother said of him to the king. Behold there |[|^[11]is a man in thy kingdom, in whom is the spirit of the Gods holy Gods, And in the days of thy father, light & understanding & wisdom like the wisdome of the Gods, was found in him; whom the king Nebuchadnezzar thy father, the king, I say, thy father made master of the magit|c|ians, astrologers, Caldeans & soothsayers: forasmuch as an excellent spirit was found in him & knowledge, & understanding, interpreting of dreams, & shewing of hard sentences, & dissolving of doubts, were found in him the same Daniel, whom the king named Belteshas|z|zar. D Dan. V.11, 12. Daniel was in the greatest credit amongst the Iews till the reign of the Roman Emperor Hadrian: & to reject his prophesies is to reject the Christian religion. For this religion is founded upon his prophesy concerning the Messiah.

Now in this vision of the Image composed of four metals the foundation of all Daniels prophesies is laid. It represents a body of four great nations which should reign over the earth successively: viz^t the people of Babylonia, the Persians, the Greeks, & the Romans. And by \a/ stone cut out without hands, which fell upon the feet of the image, & brake all the four metalls <10r> to pieces |& became a great mountain| & filled the earth, it further represents that a new kingdom should arise after the four & conquer all those nations & grow very great & last to the end of ages.

The head of the image was of gold, & signifies the nations of Babylonia who reigned first, as Daniel himself interprets. Thou art this head of gold, saith he to Nebuchadnezzar. These nations reigned till Cyrus conquered Babylon, & within a few months after that conquest revolted to the^[12] Persians & set them up above the Medes. The breast & arms of the image were of silver & represent the Persians who reigned next. The belly & thighs of the image were of brass & represent the Greeks who under the dominion of Alexander the great conquered the Persians & reigned next after them. The leggs were of iron & represent the Romans who reigned next after the Greeks, & began to conquer them in the eighth year of Antiochus Epiphanes. For in that year they conquered Perseus king of Macedon the fundamental kingdom of the Greeks, & from thence forward grew into a mighty empire & reigned with great power till the days of Theodosius the great. Then by the incursion of many northern nations they brake into many smaller kingdoms which are represented by the feet & toes of the image composed part of iron & part of clay. For then, saith Daniel, the kingdom shall be divided, & there shall be in it of the strength of iron, but they shall not cleave to one to another.

And in the days of these kings, saith Daniel, shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed nor left to other people, but it shall break in pieces all & consume all these kingdoms, & it shall stand for ever: For{illeg}|as| much as thou sawest the stone was cut out of the mountains without hands, & that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the silver & the gold.

<11r>

Chap. III |4|
Of the vision of the four Beasts.

In the next vision, which is of the four Beasts, the prophesy of the four empires is repeated, with several new additions; such as are the two wings of the Lion, the three ribs in the mouth of the Bear, the four wings & four heads of the Leopard, the eleven horns of the fourth Beast, & the son of man coming in the clouds of heaven to the ancient of days sitting in judgment.

The first Beast was like a Lion, & had eagles wings, to denote the provinces \kingdoms/ of Babylonia & Assyria of which the first of the four Empires, from the time of the fall of the Assyrian empire, was composed this was the empire of Nebuchadnezzar & his successors which reigned at the time of this prophesy. \Media, w^ch overthrew the Assyrian Empire & divided it between them, & thereby became considerable, {illeg}|&| grew into great empires. In the former Prophesy the Empire of Babylonia was represented by the head of gold; in this both empires are represented together by the two wings of the Lion./ And I beheld, saith Daniel^[13], till the wings thereof were pluckt, wherewith it was lifted up from the earth, & made to stand upon the feet like \as/ a man, & a man's heart was given to it; that is, till it was humbled & subdued, & made to know that it was its humane state.

The second Beast was like a Bear, & represents the empire which reigned next after the Babylonians, that is, the empire of the Persians. Thy kingdom is divided or broken, saith Daniel to the last king of Babylon, & given to the Medes & Persians, Dan. V.28. This Beast raised it self up on one side; the Persians being under the Medes at the fall of Babylon, but presently rising up above them. And it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it,^[14] to signify the kingdoms of Sardes, Babylon & Egypt, w^ch were conquered by it, but did not belong to its proper body. And it devoured much flesh, the riches of those three kingdoms.

The third Beast was the kingdom which succeeded the Persian; & this was the empire of the Greeks, Dan. VIII.6, 7, 20, 21. It was like a Leopard to signify its fierceness, & had four heads & four wings to signify that it should become divided into four kingdoms Dan. VIII.22. For it continued in a monarchical form during the reign of Alexander the great & his brother Aridæus, & yo\u/ng sons Ale\x/ander & Hercules; & then brake into four kingdoms, by the governours of provinces putting crowns on their own heads, & \by mutual consent/ reigning over their provinces. Cassander reigned over Macedon, Greece & Epire; Lysimachus over Thrace \& Bithynia/; Ptolomy over Egypt, L{i}|y|by|i|a, & Ethiopia \Arabia, Cœlos{yr}ia, {sic} |Cœlosyria,| & Palæstine;/, & Seleucus over Syria.

The fourth Beast was the Empire w^ch succeed\ed/ that of the Greeks, & this was the Roman. This Beast was exceeding dreadfull & terrible, & had great iron teeth, & devoured & brake in pieces, & stamped the residue with its feet. And such was the Roman Empire. It was larger, stronger, & more formidable & lasting the|a|n any of the former. It conquered the kingdom of Macedon, the fundamental kingdom of the Greeks, (together with Illyricum & Epire) in the eighth year of Antiochus Epiphanes, Anno Nabonass. 500;^[15] & inherited that of Pergamus Anno Nabonass. 615; & conquered that of Syria Anno Nabonass. 679, & that of Egypt, Anno Nabonass. 718. And by these \& other/ conquests it became greater & more terrible then any of the three former Beasts. This Empire continued in its greatness till the reign of Theodosius the great; & then brake into ten kingdoms, represented by the ten horns of this Beast; & continued in a broken form, till the a|A|nt|c|ient of days sat in a throne like fiery flame, & the judgment was set, & the books were opened, & the Beast was slain & his body given to the burning flames; & one like the son of man came with the clouds of heaven & was brought before the Ancient of days^[16], & received dominion over all nations, <12r> & judgment was given to the saints of the most high, & the time came that they possessed the kingdom.

I beheld, saith Daniel^[17], till the Beast was slain, & his body destroyed, & & given to the burning flames. As concerning the rest of the Beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season & a time. And therefore all the four Beasts are still alive, the|o| the dominion of the three first are still be taken away. The nations of Chaldea & Assyria are still the first Beast. Those of Media & Persia are still the second Beast. Those of Macedon, Greece & Thrace, Asia minor, Syria & Egypt,\×^[18]/ are still the third. And those of Europe on this side Greece are still the fourth. Se\e/ing therefore that the body of the third beast is confined to the nations on this side {illeg} the river Euphrates, & that the body of the fourth Beast is confined to the nations on this side Greece; we are to look for all the four heads of the third Beast, among the nations on this side of the river Euphrates; & for all the eleven horns of the fourth Beast, among the nations on this side of Greece. And therefore, at the breaking of the Greek empire into four kingdoms of the Greeks, we include no part of the Chaldeans, Medes & Persians in those kingdoms, because they belonged to the bodies of the two first Beasts. Nor do we reckon the Greek empire seated at Constantinople among the horns of the fourth Beast, because it belonged to the body of the third.

<13r>

^[19]|[|Chap.IV.
Of the kingdoms represented by the feet
of the image
composed of iron & clay.

Dacia was a large country bounded on the south by the Danube, on the east by the Euxine sea, on the north by the river Neister & the mountain Crapac, & on the west by the river Tibesis, or Teys, w^ch runs southward into the Danube a little above Belgrade. It comprehended the countries now called Transylvania, Moldavia, & Wallachia, & the eastern part of Hungary the upper Hungary. Its ancient inhabitants were called Getæ by the Greeks, Daci by the Latines, & Goths by themselves. Alexander the great attaqued them, & Trajan conquered them, & reduced their country into a Province of the Roman Empire: & thereby the propagation of the Gospel among them was much promoted. They were composed of several Gothic nations, called Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Vandals, Gepides, Lombards, Burgundians, Alans, &c: \who/ all w^ch agreed in their manners, & spake the same language, as Procopius represents. While they lived under the Romans the Goths or Ostrogoths were seated in the eastern parts of Dacia, the Vandals in the western part upon the river Teys, where the rivers Maresh & Keresh run into it. The Visigoths were between them. The Gepides, according to Iornandes, were upon the Vistula. The Burgundians (a Vandalic nation) were between the Vistula & the southern fountain of the Boristhenes, at some distance from the mountain Crapac northwards, where Ptolomy places them, by the names of Phrugundiones & Burgiones. The Alans (another^a[20] Gothic nation) were between the northern fountain of the Boristhenes & the mouth of the river Tanais, where Ptolomy placeth the mountain Alanus, & western side of the Palus Mæotis.

These nations continued under the dominion of the Romans till the second year of the emperor Philip, & then for want of \their/ military pay began to revolt; & the Ostrogoths set up a kingdom, which, under their kings Ostrogotha, Cniva, Araric, Geberic, & Hermaneric, increased till the year \of Christ/ 376; & then by an incursion of the Huns from {illeg} beyond the Tanais, & the death of Hermaneric, brake into several smaller kingdoms. Hunnimund, the son of Hermaneric, became king of \over/ the Ostrogoths; Fridigern over the Visigoths; Winithar, or Vinithar, over a part of the Goths called Gruthungi by Ammian, Gothunni by Claudian, & Sarmatæ & Scythians by others; Athaneric over another part of the Goths in Dacia, called Thervingi; & Box over the Antes in Sarmatia. And the Gepides had also their king. The Vandals fled over the Danube from Geberic in the latter end of the reign of Constantine the great, & had seats granted to them in Pannonia by that Emperor, & there lived quietly forty years, viz^t till the year 377, when several Gothic nations flying from the Hunns came over the Danube, & had seats granted them in Mæsia & Thrace by the Greek Emperor Valens.,|.| But the next year they revolted, & called in some Goths, Alans & Hunns, from beyond the Danube, & routed the Roman army, & slew the emperor Valens, & spread themselves into Greece & Pannonia as far as to the Alps. But in the years 379 & 380 they were checkt by the arms of the Emperors Gratian & Theodosius, & made a submissive peace; & the Visigoths & Thervingi returned to their seats in Mæsia & Thrace, & the Hunns retired over the Danube, & the Alans & Gruthungi obte|a|ined seats in Pannonia.

About the year 373, or 374, the Burgundians rose from their seats in upon the Vistula with an army of eighty thousand men to invade Gallia; & being opposed, seated themselves upon the northern side of the Rhine over against Mentz. And i|I|n the year 358, a body of the Salian Franks, with their king, coming from the river Sala, were received into the empire by the emperor Iulian, & seated in Gallia between Brabant & the Rhe|i|ne. <14r> And their king Mellobaudes was made Comes domesticorum & Magister by the emperor Gratian. And Richomer, another noble Salian Franck, was made Comes domesticorum, & Magister utriusqꝫ Militiæ, by Theodosius; & A.C. 384 was Consul with Clearchus. He was a great favourite of Theodosius, & & accompanied him in his warrs against Eugenius, but died in the expedition, & left a son called Theudemir, who afterwards became king of the Salian Franks in Brabant. In the time of this war some Frak|n|ks from beyond the Rhe|i|ne invaded Gallia under the conduct of Genobald, Marcomir & Suno, but were repulsed by Stilico; & Marcomir being slain, was succeeded in Germany by his son Pharamund.

While these nations remained quiet within the Empire subject{illeg} to the Romans, many others continued beyond the Danube till the death of the emperor Theodosius, & then rose up in arms. For Paulus Diaconus in his Historia Miscella/.\ Lib. XIV, speaking of the times next after the death of this Emperor, tell us: Eodem tempore erant Gothi et aliæ gentes maximæ trans Danubium habitantes: ex quibus rationabiliores quatuor sut|n|t, Gothi scilicet, Huisogothi, Gepides & Vandali; et nomen tantum & nihil aliud mutantes. Isti sub Arcadio et Honorio Danubium transeuntes, locati sunt in terra Romanorum: et Gepides quidem (ex quibus postea divisi sunt Langobardi et Avares) villas, quæ sunt circa Singidonum & Sirmium, habitavere. And Procopius in the beginning of his Historia Vandalica writes to the same purpose. Hitherto the western Empire continu'd entire, but now brake into many kingdoms.

Theodosius died A.C. 395; & then then the Visigoths, under the conduct of Alaric the successor of Fridigern, rose from their seats in Thrace, & wasted Macedon, Thessaly, Achaia, Peloponnesus, & Epire with fire & sword five years together; & then turning westward, invaded Dalmatia, Illyricum & Pannonia; & from thence went into Italy A.C. 402, & the next year were so beaten at Pollentia & Verona by Stilico the commander of the forces of the western Empire, that Claudian calls the remainder of the forces of Alaric, tanta ex gente reliquias breves, & Prudentius Gentem deletam. Thereupon Alaric made peace with the Emperor, being so far humbled that Orosius saith, he did pro pace optima & quibuscunqꝫ sedibus simpliciter et suppliciter & simpliciter orare. This peace was ratified by mutual hostages; & Ætius was sent hostage to Alaric; & therefore Alaric continued a free Prince in the seats now granted to him.

When Alaric took up arms, the nations beyond the Danube began to be in motion; & the next winter (the winter between A.C. 395 & A.C. 396) a great body of Hunns, Alans, Ostrogoths, Gepides, & other northern nations, came over the frozen Danube, being invited by Ruffin: & their brethren also, who had obte|a|ined seats within the Empire, took up arms. Ierome calls all this great multitude, Hunns, Alans, Vandals, Goths, Sarmatans, Quades, & Marcomans; & saith, that they invaded all places between Constantinople & the Iulian Alps, wasting Scythia, Thrace, Macedon, Dardania, Dacia, Thessaly, Achaia, Epire, Dalmatia, & all Pannonia. And the Suevians also invaded Rhætia. For when Alaric ravaged Pannonia, the Romans were defending Rhætia; w^ch gave Alaric an opportunity of defend invading Italy, as Claudian thus mentions.

And when Alaric went from those parts into Italy, some other barbarian|rou|s |nations| invaded Noricum & Vindelicia, as the same Poet Claudian thus mentions.

This was in the years 402 & 403. And among these nations I reccon the Suevians, Quades, & Marcomans; For they were all in arms at this time, & the Quades & Marcomans were all in arms at this time, & The Quades & Marcomans were Suevian nations; & they and the Suevians came originally from Bohemia, & the river Suevus or Sprake in Lusatia, & were now united under one common king called Ermeric, who soon after led them into Gallia. The Vandals & Alans <15r> might also about this time extend themselves into Noricum. Also Vldino with a great body of Hunns passed the Danuble about the time of Chrysostom's banishment, that is, A.C. 404, & wasted Thrace & Mœsia. And Radagaisus king of the Gruthunni & successor of Winithar, inviting over more barbarians from beyond the Danube, invaded Italy with an army of above two hunded {sic} thousand Goths; & the next year \within a year or two/ (A.C. 405 or 406) was overcome by Stilico, & perished with his Army. In this was|r| Stilico was assisted with a great bo\d/y of Huns & Ostrogoths under the conduct of Vldin & Sarus: They were hired by Emperor Honorius. And in all this confusion it was necessary for the Lombards in Pannonia to arm themselves in their own defence, & assert their liberty, the Romans being no longer able to protect them.

And now Stilico purposing to make himself Emperor, procured a military prefecture for Alaric, & sent him into the east in the service of Honorius the western Emperor, committing some Roman troops to his conduct to strengthen his army of Goths, & promising to follow soon after with his own army. His pretence was to recover some regions of Illyricum, which the eastern Emperor was accused to detain injuriously from the western; but his secret designe was to make himself Emperor, by the assistance of the Vandals & their ally|i|es: For he himself was a Vandal. And for faciliating this designe, he invited a great body of the barbarous nations to invade the western Empire, while he & Alaric invaded the eastern. And these nations under their several kings, the v|V|andals under Godegisilus, the Alans in two bodies, the one under Goar, the other under Resplendial, & the Suevians Quades & Marcomans under Ermeric, marched through Rhetia to the side of the Rhe|i|ne, ^[21]|[|leaving their seats in Pannonia to the Hunns & Ostrogoths, & joyned the Burgundians under Gundicar, & ruffled the Franks in their further march. And o|O|n the last day of December A.C. 406, they passed the Rhe|i|ne at Ments, & diffused^[22] themselves into Germania prima & the adjacent regions; & amongst other actions the Vandals took Trevirs^[23]. Then they advanced into Belgium, & began to ruffle^[24] that country. Whereupon the Salian Franks in Brabant took up arms, & under the conduct of Theudemir, the son of Ricimer, or Richomer, above mentioned, made so stout a resistance, that they slew almost twenty thousand of the Vandals, with their king Godegesilus, in battel; the rest escaping only by a party of Resplendial's Alans coming \which came/ timely to their assistance.

Then the British soldiers, allarm'd by the rumour of these things, revolted, & s{illeg}|e|t up Tyrants there; first Marcus, whom they slew presently; then Gratian, whom they slew within four months; & lastly Constantine, under whom they invaded Gallia A.C. 408, being favoured by Goar & Gundicar. And Constantine having possessed a good part of Gallia, created a good par his son Constans Cæsar, & sent him into Spain to order his affairs there, A.C. 409.

In the mean time Resplendial, seing the aforesaid disaster of the Vandals, & that Goar was gone over to the Romans, led his armi|y| from the Rhe|i|ne; & together with the Suevians, & residue of the Vandals, went towards Spain; the Franks in the mean time prosecuting their victory so far as to retake Trevirs^[25], w^ch after they had plundered it, they left to the Romans. The Barbarians were at first stopt by the Pyrena|e|an mountains, which made them diffuse^[26] themselves into Aquitain: but the next year they had the passage betrayed unto them by some soldiers of Constans; & entring Spain 4 Kal. Octob. A.C. 409, every one conquered what he could; & at length (A.C. 411) they divided their conquests by lot, & the Vandals obte|a|ined Bœtica, & part of Gall{illeg}|æ|cia, the Suevians the rest of Gallæcia, & the Alans Lusitania & the Carthaginensian Province: the Emperor for the sake of peace confirming them in those seats by grant A.C. 413.

Also the Roman Franks above mentioned, having made Theudemir their king, began streight after their conquest of the Vandals to invade their neighbours. The first they set upon were the ^✝[27] Gal\u/ls of Brabant: but meeting with notable resistance, they desired their alliance. And so those Gal\u/ls fell off from the Romans, & made an intimate league with the Franks to be as one people, marrying with one another, & conforming to one another's manners, till they became without distinction. Thus by the access of these Gal\u/ls, & of the forreign Franks also, who afterwards came over the Rhe|i|ne, the Salian kingdom soon grew very great & powerfull.

Stilico's expedition against the Greek Emperor was stopt by the order of Honorius; & then Alaric came out of Epire into Noricum, & requested a summ <16r> of money for his service. The Senate were inclined to deny him, but by |at| by Stilico's mediation granted it. But after a while Stilico being accused of a traiterous conspiracy with Alaric, & slain 10 Kal. Sept. A.C. 408, & Alaric thereby disappointed of his money, & reputed an enemy to the empire; he brake streight into Italy with his army which he brought out of Epire, & sent to his brother Adolphus to follow him with what forces he had in Pannonia, w^ch were not great but yet not to be despised. Thereupon Honorius fearing to be shut up in Rome, retired to Ravenna in October A.C. 408. And from that time Ravenna continued to be the seat of the western Emperors. In those days the Hunns also invaded Pannonia; & seizing the deserted seats of the Vandals, Alans & Goths, founded a new kingdom there. And Alaric advancing to Rome besieged it, & 9 Kal. Sept. A.C. 410 took it: & afterwards attempting to pass into Afric, was shipwrackt. After which Honorius made peace with him, & got up an army to send against the Tyrant Constantine.^[28]

At the same time Gerontius, one of Constantine's captains, revolted from him, & set up Maximus Emperor in Spain. Whereupon Constantine sent Edobec, another of his captains, to draw to his assistance, beside the barbarians under Goar & Gundicar in Gallia, supplies of Franks & Alemans from beyond the Rhe|i|ne; & committed the custody of Vienna in Narbonne to his son Constans. Gerontius advancing, first slew Constans at Vienna, & then began to besiege Constantine at Arles. But Honorius at the same time sending Constantius with an army on the same errand, Gerontius fled, & Constantius continued the siege, being strengthned by the access of the greatest part of the soldiers of Gerontius. After four months siege, Edobec having procured succours, the barbarian kings at Ments, Goar & Gundicar, constitute Iovinus Emperor, & together with him set forward to relieve Arles. At their approach Constantius retired. They pursued, & he beat them by surprise; but not prosecuting his victory, the barbarians soon recovered themselves; yet not so as to hinder the fall of the tyrants Constantine, Iovinus & Maximus. But Britain could not be recovered to the empire, but remained ever after a distinct kingdom.

The next year (A.C. 412) the Visigoths being beaten in Italy, had had Aquitain granted them to retire into: & they invaded it with much violence, causing the Alans & Burgundians to retreat, who were then depopulating it. At the same time the Burgundians were b\r/ought to peace; & the Emperor granted them for inheritance a region upon the Rhene which they had invaded. And the same I presume he did with the Alans. But the Franks not long after retaking & burning Trevirs^[29], Castinus, A.C. 415, was sent against them with an army, & routed \them/ & slew Theudomir their king. This was the second s{illeg} taking of Trevirs^[30] by the Franks. It was therefore taken four times, once by the Vandals & th{illeg}|rice| by the Franks. Theudemir was succeeded by Pharamond, then |t|a|h||e| Prince or King of the Salian Franks in Germany. From thence he brought new forces, reigned over the whole, & had seats granted to his people neare within the empire neare the Rhe|i|ne.

And now the Barbarians were all quieted, & se\t/tled in several kingdoms within the Empire, not only by conquest, but also by the grants of the emperor Honorius. For Rutilius in his Itinerary, written in Autumn, Anno Vrbis 1169, that is (according to Varro's computation then in use) A.C. 416, thus laments the wasted fields:

And Orosius in the end of his history, which was finished A.C. 417, represents now a general pacification of the barbarous nations by the words comprimere, coangustare, addicere gentes immanissimas; terming them imperio addictas, because they had obteined seats in the empire by league & compact; & co{r}|a|ngustatas, because they did no longer invade all regions at pleasure, but by the same compact remained quiet in the seats then granted them. And these are the kingdoms, of w^ch the feet of the Image were henceforward composed, & which are represented by iron & clay intermixed, which did not stick one to another, & were of different strength.

<17r>

Chap. V. \6/
Of the ten kingdoms represented by
the ten horns of the
fourth Beast.

Now by the warrs above described the western empire of the Romans, was \about the time that Rome was besieged & taken by the Goths, became/ broken into the following ten kingdoms.

• 1 The kingdoms|e| of the Vandals & Alans in Spain & Afric

• 2 The kingdom of the Su\e/vians in Spain

• 2|3| The kingdom of the Visigoths.

• 4 The kingdom of the Alans in Gallia.

• 5 The kingdom of the Burgundians.

  6 The kingdom of the Franks.

  7 The kingdom of the Burgundians Britains.

• 8 The kingdom of the Hunns.

  9 The kingdom of the Lombards

  10 The kingdom of Ravenna.

Seven of these kingdoms are thus mentioned by Sigonius. ^[31]\1/ Honorio regnante, in Pannoniam ² Hunni, in Hispaniam ³ Vandali, ⁴ Alani, ⁵ Suevi & ⁶ Gothi, in Galliam ⁴ Alani ⁷ Burgundiones et ⁶ Gothi, certis sedibus permissis, accepti. Add the Franks, Britains, & Lombards, & you have the th|e|n. For these arose about the same time with the ten seven. But let us view them severally.

1. The kings of the Vandals were, A.C. 406\7/^[32], Godegisilus, 407 Gunderic, 426 Geiseric, 477 Hunneric, 484 Gundemund, 496 Thrasamund, 523 Geiseric, 53{5}|0| Gelimer. Godegesilus led them into Gallia A.C. 406, Gunderic into Spain A.C. 409. Geiseric into Afric\a/ A.C. 427, & Gelimer was conquered by Belisarius A.C. 533. Their kingdom lasted in Gallia, Spain & Afric|a| together 126 years; & in Afric|a| they were very potent. The Alans had only two kings of their own in Spain, Resplendial, & Ataces, Vtacus or Othacar. Vnder Resplendial they went into France A.C. 407, & into Spain A.C. 409. And Ataces was slain with almost all his army by Vallia king of the Visigoths A.C. 419. And then the remainder of these Alans subjected themselves to Gunderic king of the Vandals in Bœtica, & went afterwards with them into Africa, as I learn out of Procopius. And t|W|hence the kings of the Vandals sti|y|led themselves kings of the Vandals & Alans; as may be seen in the Edict of Hunneric recited by Victor in his Vandalic persecution. In conjunction with the ^[33]|[|Chatti, these Alans gave the name of Cathalaunia, or Catth-Alania, to the Province which is still so called. These Alans had also Gepides among them; & therefore the Gepides came into Pannonia before the Alans left it. There they became subject to the Hunns till the death of Attila A.C. 454, & at length were conquered by the Ostrogoths.

2. The kings of the Suevians were A.C. 40{6}6 Alaric 406 \407/ Ermeric, 483 Rechila, 448 Rechiarius, 458 Maldra, 460 Frumarius, 463 Regismund. And after some other kings \who/ are unknown, reigned A.C. 558 Theodemir, 568 Miro, 582 Euboricus, & 583 Andeca. This kingdom, after it had been once seated in Spain, remained always in Gallæcia & Lusitania. Ermeric after the fall of the Alan kingdom, enlarged it into all Gallicia, forcing the Vandals to retire into Bœtica & the Carthaginensian Province. This kingdom after it had been once seated lasted 177 years according to Isidorus, & then was subdued by Leovigildus king of the Visigoths, & made a Province of his kingdom A.C. 585.

3. The kings of the Visigoths were A.C. 400 Alaric, 410 Athaulphus, 415 Sergeric & Vallia, 419 Theoderic, 451 Thorismund, 452 Theoderic, <18r> 465 Euric, 482 Alaric, 505 Gensalaric, 526 Amalaric, 531 Theudius, 548 Theudisclus, &c. I date this kingdom from the time that Alaric left Thrace & Greece to invade the western Empire. In the end of the reign of A{illeg}thaulphus the Goths were humbled by the Romans, & attempted to pass out of France into Spain. Sergeric reigned but a few days. In the beginning of Vallia's reign they assaulted the Romans afresh, but were again repulsed, & then made peace on this condition, that they should on the behalf of the empire invade the barbarian kingdoms in Spain. And this they did, together with the Romans, in the years 417 & 418, overthrowing the Alans & part of the Vandals. And t|T|hen they received Aquitain of the Emperor by a full donation, leaving their conquests in Spain to the Emperor: A\a/nd thereby the seats of the conquered Alans came into the hands of the Romans. In the year 455, Theoderic (assisted by the Burgundians) invaded Spain, w^ch was then almost all subject to the Suevians, & took a part of it from them. A.C. 506, the Goths were driven out of Gallia by the Franks. A.C. 585, they conquered the Suevian kingdom, & became Lords of all Spain. A.C. 713, the Saracens invaded them, but in time they recovered their dominions, & have reigned in Spain ever since

4. The kings of the Alans in Gallia were Goar, Sambida, Eocharic, Sangibanus, Beurgus, &c. Vnder Goar they invaded Gallia A.C. 406|7|, & had seats given them neare the Rhe|i|ne, A.C. 412. Vnder Sambida (whom Bucher puts \makes/ the successor, if non|t| the son of Goar) they had the territories of Valence given them by Ætius the Emperor's {illeg}|G|enerall, A.C. 440. Vnder Eocharic they conquered a region of the rebelling Galli Arborici, given them by Ætius. This region was from them named Alencomium, quasi Alanorum conventus. Vnder Sangibanus they were invaded, & their regal city Orleans besieged by Attila king of the Hunns, with a vast army of 500000 men. And Ætius & the barbarian kings of Gallia came to raise the siege, & beat the Hunns in a very memorable battel, A.C. 451, in cap \{×}/^[34] campis Catalaunicis, so called from these Alans mixt with the Chatti. The region is now contractly called Campane. In that battel were slain on both sides 162000 men. A year or two after, Attila returned with an immense army to conquer this kingdom, bus|t| was again beaten by them & the Visigoths together in a battle of three days continuance, with a slaughter almost as great as the former. Vnder Beurgus, or Biorgor, they infested Gallia round about, till the reign of Maximus the Emperor; & then they passed the Alps in winter, & came into Liguria, but were there beaten, & Beurgus slain, by Ricimer commander of the Emperor's forces, A.C. 464. Afterwards they were again beaten, by the joint force of Odoacer king of Italy & Childeric king of the Franks, about the year 480, & again by Theudebert king of the Austrian Franks about the year 511.

5. The kings of the Burgundians were A.C. 407 Gundicar, 436 Gundioc, 467 Bilimer, 473 Gundobaldus with his brothers, 510 Sigismund, 517 Godomarus. Vnder Gundicar they invaded Gallia A.C. 407, & had seats given them by the Emperor neare the Rhe|i|ne in Gallia Belgica, A.C. 412. They had Saxons among them, & were now so potent, that Orosius A.C. 417 wrote of them: Burgundionum esse prævalidam manum, Galliæ hodieqꝫ testes sunt, in quibus præsumpta possessione consistunt. About the year 435 they received great overthrows by Ætius, & soon after by the Hunns: but five years after had Saxony Savoy granted them to be shared by the i{illeg}|w|ith the inhabitants; & from that time became again a potent kingdom, being bounded by the river Rhodanus, but afterwards extending much further into the heart of Gallia. Gundobald conquered the regions about the rivers Araris & Rhodanus, with the territories of Marseille|s;| & invaded Italy in the times of the Emperor Gli|y|cerius, & conquered all his brethren. Godomarus made Orleans his royal seat: {illeg}|w|hence the kingdome was called Regnum Aurelianorum. He was conquered by Clotharius & Childebert, kings of France the Franks, A.C. 526. And f|F|rom thence forward this kingdom was sometimes united to the kingdom of the Franks, & sometimes divided from it, till the reign of Charles the great, who made his son Carolottus king of Burgundy. And from that time, for about 3{illeg}|0|0 years together, it enjoyed its proper kings; & was then broken into the Dukedome of Burgundy, & County of Burgundy & County of Savoy; & afterwards those were broken into other lesser Counties.

6. The kings of the Franks were A.C. 407 Theudemir, 417 Pharamund, 428 Clodio, 448 Merovæus, 456 Childeric, 482 Clodo <19r> væus &c. Windeline & Bucher, two of the most diligent searchers into the originals of this kingdom, make it begin the same year with the Barbarian invasions of Gallia, that is, A.C. 407. Of the first kings there is in Labbee's Bibliotheca M.S. this record.

Historica quædam excerpta ex veteri stemmate genealogico Regum Franciæ Franciæ.

Genobaldus, Marcomerus, Suno, Theodemeris. Isti duces vel Reguli extiterunt a principio gentis Francorum diversis temporibus. Sed incertum relinquunt historici quali sibi procreationis lineâ successerunt.

Pharamundus: Sub hoc rege suo primo Franci legibus se subdunt, quas Primores eorum tulerunt Wisogastus, Atrogastus, Salegastus.

Chlochilo. Iste, transito Rheno, Romanos in Carbonaria sylva devicit, Camaracum cœpit & obtinuit, annis 20 regnavit. Sub hoc rege Franci usqꝫ Sum\m/am progressi sunt.

Merovechus. Sub hoc rege Franci Trevirim destruunt, Metim succendunt, usqꝫ Aurelianum perveniunt.

Now for Genobaldus, Marcomer & Suno, they were capitains of the Transrhenane Franks in the reign of Theodosius, & concern us not. We are to begin with Theudemer the first king of the rebelling Salij, called Didio by I|I|vo Carnotensis, & Thed|ie|do & Theudemerus by Rhenanus. His face is extant in a coy|i|n of gold found with this inscription, THE{illeg}VDEMER REX, published by Petavius; & still or lately extant, as Windeline testifies: which shews that he was a king, & that in Gallia, seeing that rude Germany understood not then the coining of money, nor used either Latin words or letters. He was the son of Richemer, or Richomer, the favourite of the Emperor Theodosius; & so being a Roman Franck, & of the Salian royal blood, they therefore upon the rebellion made him king. The whole time of his reign you have stated in Excerptis Gregorij Turonent|s|is e Fredigario, cap. 5, 6, 7, 8, where the making him king, the tyranny of Iovinus, the slaughter of the associates of Iovinus, the second taking of Trevirs^[35] by the Franks, & their war with Castinus in which this king was slain, are as a series of successive |t|{illeg}|h|ings thus set down in order. Extinctis Ducibus in Francis, denuo Reges creantur ex eadem stirpe qua prius fuerant. Eodem tempore Iovinus ornatus regios assumpsit. Constantinus^[36] fugam versus Italiam dirigit; missis a Iovino Principe percussoribus super Mentio flumine capite truncatur. Multi nob|i|lium jussu Iovini apud Avernis^[37] capti, et a ducibus Honorij crudeliter interempti sunt. Trevirorum civitas, factione unius ex senatoribus nomine Lucij, a Francis capta & incensa est. — — Castinus Domesticorum c|C|omes expeditionem accipit contra Francos, &c. Then returning to speak of Theudemir, he adds: Franci electum a se regem|{|}||,| sicut prius fuerat|{|}||,| crinitum|{|}||,| inquirentes diligenter ex genere Priami, Frigi et Francionis, super se crearunt nomine Theudemerum filium Richemeris, qui in hoc prælio quod supra memini, a Romanis interfectus est; that is, in the battel with Castinus his army. Of his death Gregory Turonensis makes this further mention: In consularibus legimus Theodemerem regem Francorum & filium Ricimeris quondam, et Ascilam matrem ejus, gladio interc{illeg}|fec|{illeg}tos.

Vpon this victory of the Romans, the Franks & rebelling Gal\u/ls, who in the time of Theudemir were {in} \at/ war with one another, united to strengthen themselves, as Ordericus Vitalis^a[38] thus mentions. Cum Galli prius contra Romanos rebellâssent, Franci ijs sociati sunt, et pariter juncti Ferramundum Sunonis Ducis Filium, sibi regem præfecerunt. Prosper sets down the time; Anno 25 Honorij, Pharamundus regnat in Francia. This Bucher well observes^[39], referrs to the end of the year \of Christ/ 416, or the beginning of the next year, dating the years of Honorius from the death of Valentinian; & argues well, that at this time Pharamund was not only king by the constitution of the Franks, but crowned also by the consent of Honorius, & had a part of Gallia assigned to him by covenant. And this might be the cause that Roman writers recc|k|oned him the first king: Which some not understanding, have reputed him the founder of this kingdom by an army of the transrhenane Franks. And he might come with such an army, but he succeeded Theudemir by right of blood & consent of the people. For the <20r> above cited passage of Fredegarius, Extinctis Ducibus in Francis denuo Reges creantur ex eadem stirpe, quâ prius, implies that the kingdom continued to this new elected family, t|d|uring the reign of more kings the|a|n one. If you date the years of Honorius from the death of his father, the reign of Pharamund might begin two years later the|a|n is assigned by Bucher. The Salique laws made in his ^[40]|[|reign, which are yet extant, shew by their name that it was the kingdom of the Salij over which he reigned; & by the pecuniary mulcts in them, that the place where he reigned, abounded much with money, & consequently was within the Empire, rude Germany knowing not the use of money, till they mixed with the Romans. Also in the Preface to the Salique laws (written & prefixed to them soon after the conversion of the Franks to the Christian religion, that is, in the end of the reign of Merovæus, or soon after,) the original of this kingdom is thus described: Hæc enim gens, quæ fortis dum esset, et robore valida, Romanorum jugum durissimum de suis cervicibus excussit pugnando, &c. This kingdom therefore was erected, not by invasion but by rebellion, as was describeb|d| above. Prosper in regestring their kings in order, tells us: Pharamundus regnat in Francia; Clodio regnat in Francia; Merovæus regnat in Francia: & who can imagin but that in all these places he meant one & the same Francia? And yet it's certain that the Francia of Merovæus was in Gallia.

Yet the father of Pharamund, being king of a body of Fra\n/ks in Germany in the reign of the Emperor Theodosius, as above, Pharamund might reign over the same Franks in Germany before he succeeded Theudemer in the kingdom of the Salians within the empire, & even before Theudemer began his reign; suppose in the first year of Honorius, or when those Franks being repulsed by Stico|{lico}||,| {sic} |Stilico,| lost their kings Marcomir & Suno, one of which\om/ was the father of Pharamund. And the Roman Franks, after the death of Theudemer, might invite Pharamund with his people over from beyond the Rhe|i|ne. But we are not to regard the reign of Pharamund in Germany: We are to date this kingdom from its rise within the empire, & to look upon it as strengthed|n|ed by the access of other Franks coming from beyond the Rhe|i|ne, whether in the reign of this king or in that of his successor Clodio. For in the last year of Pharamund's reign, Ætius took from him a part of his possession a part of his possession in Gallia: but his successor Clodio (whom Fredigarius represents the son of Theudemer, & some call Clogio, Cloio, & Claudius) inviting from beyond the Rhe|i|ne a great body of Franks, recovered all, & carried on their conquests as far as the river Some. And t|T|hen those Franks dividing conquests with him, erected certain new kingdoms at Colen & Cambray, & some other cities: all which were afterwards conquered by Clodovæus, who also drave the Goths out of Gallia, & placed |fix'd| his seat at Paris, where it had\s/ continued ever since. And this was the original of the present kingdom of France.

7. The kings of Britain were A.C. 407 or 408, Marcus, Gratian, & Constantine successively; A.C. 425 Vortigern, 466 Aurelius Ambrosius, 497|8| Vther Pendraco, 508 Arthur, 542 Constantinus, 545 Aurelius Cunanus, 578 Vortiporeus, 581 Malgo, 586 Careticus, 613 Cadwan, 635 Cadwalin, 676 Cadwa|l|lader: The first three were Roman Tyrants, who revolted from the empire. Orosius, Prosper & Zosimus connect their revolt with the irruptions of the barbarians into Gallia, as consequent thereunto. And Prosper (with whom Zosimus agrees) puts it in the year w^ch began the day after that irruption. The just time I thus collect: Marcus reigned not many days, Gratian four months, & Constantine three years. He was slain the year after the taking of Rome, that is A.C. 411, 14 Kal Octob. Whence the revolt was in Spring A.C. 408. Sozomen joyns Constantine's expedition into Gallia with Arcadius's expedition death, or the times a little after, & Arcadius died A.C. 408 May 1^st. Now tho the reign of these Tyrants was but short, yet they gave a beginning to the kingdom of Brittain, & so may be recc|k|oned the three first kings, especially since the posteri{illeg}|t|y of Constantine (viz^t his sons sons Aurelius Ambrosius, & Vther Pendraco, & |his| grandson Arthur) reigned afterwards. For from the time of the revolt of these tyrants Britain continued a distinct kingdom absolved from subjection to the Empire, the Emperor not being {illeg}|ab|le to spare soldiers <21r> to be sent thither to receive & keep the Island, & therefore neglecting it; as we learn by unquestionable records. For Prosper tells us: A.C. 410, Variane Co{illeg}|s|{illeg}. Hac tempestate præ valetudine Romanorum vires funditus attenuatæ Britanniæ. And Sigebert, conjoy|i|ning this with the si\e/ge of Rome, saith: Britannorum vires attenuatæ, et substrahunt se a Romanorum dominatione. And Zosimus lib. 6: The Transrhenane Barbarians invading all nations places, reduced the inhabitants of the island of Britain, & also certain Celtic nations to that pass, that they fell off from the Roman Empire; & being no longer obedient to the Roman laws κατ᾽ ἑαυτὸν βιατεύειν, they lived in separate bodies after their own pleasure. Therefore the Britains taking up arms, & hazzarding themselves for their own safety, they freed their cities from the imminent Barbarians. In like manner all Brabant & some other Provinces of the Ga\u/lls imitating the Britains, freed themselves after the same manner, ejecting the Roman Presidents, & forming a certain common wealth according to their own pleasure. This rebellion of Britain & the Celtic nations happened when Constanti{a}ne usurped the kingdom. So also Procopius|,| (lib. 1. Vadal {sic} |Vandal.|)|,| speaking of the same Constantine, saith: Constantine being overcome in battel, was slain with his children: Βρετταννίαν μέν τοι Ρωμᾶιοι ἀνασώσασθαι οὐκέτι ἔχον αλλ᾽ οὖσα ὑπὸ τυραννος^[41] ἀπ᾽ ἀυτοῦ ἔμενε: Yet the Romans could not recover Britain any more, but from that time it remained under Tyrants. And Beda, (l. 1, c. 11.) Fracta est Roma a Gothis anno 1164 suæ conditionis; ex quo tempore Romani in Britannia regnare cessaverunt. And Ethelwaldus: A tempore Romæ a Gothis expugnatæ cessavit imperium Romanorum a Britannia insula, et ab alijs, quas sub jugo tenebant servitutis tenebant, multis terris. terris. And Theodoret (Serm. 9. de curand. Græc. affect.) about the year 424, recc|k|ons the Bi{illeg}|ri|ta{e}|i|ns among the nations which were not then in subjection to the Roman Empire. And s|S|o Sigonius|,| (ad annum 411)|,| Imperium Romanorum post excessum Constantini in Britannia nullum fuit.

Between the death of Constantine & the reign of Vortigern was an interregnugm of about 14 years, in which the Britains had warrs with the Picts & Scots, & twice obte|a|ined the assistance of a Roman Legion, which\o/ dra|o|ve out the enemy, but told them positively at their departure that they would come no more. Of Vortigern's beginning to reign there is this record in an old Chronicle in Nennius, quot{illeg}|e|d by Cambden & others: Guortigernus tenuit imperium in Britannia, Theodosio & Valentiniano Coss [viz^t A.C. 425.] & in quarto anno regni sui Saxones ad Britanniam venerunt, Fœlice & Tauro Coss. [viz^t A.C. 428.] This coming of the Saxons Sigebert referrs to the 4^th year of Valentinian, which falls in with the year 428 assigned by this Chronicle: And two years after, the Saxons to{t}|g|ether with the Picts were beaten by the Britains. Afterwards in the reign of Martian the Emperor, that is, between the years 450 & 456, the Saxons under Hengist were called in by the Britains, but six years after revolted from them, & made war upon them with various success, & by degrees succeeded them. Yet the Britains continued a flourishing kingdom till the reign of Careticus; & the war between the two nations^a[42] continued till the reign of Pope Sergius A.C. 688.

8. The kings of the Hunns were A.C. 406 Octar & Rugila, 433 Bleda & Attila. Octar & Rugila were the brothers of Munzuc king of the Hunns in Gothia beyond the Danube, & Bleda & Attila were his sons, & Munzuc was the son of Balamir. The two first, as Iornandes tells us, were kings of the Hunns, but not of them all, & had the two last for their successors. I date the reign of the Hunns \in Pannonia from the/ time that the Vandals & Alans relinquished Pannonia to them, A.C. 406|7|: Sigonius from the time that the Visigoths relinquished Pan{illeg}|n|onia A.C. 408. Constat, saith he, quod Gothis ex Illyrico profectis, Hunni successerunt, atqꝫ imprimis Pannoniam tenuerunt. Neque enim Honorius viribus ad resistendum in tantis difficultatibus destitutus, prorsus eos prohibere potuit, sed meliore consilio, animo ad pacem converso, fœdus cum eis, datis acceptisqꝫ obsidibus fecit; ex quibus qui dati sunt, Ætius, qui etiam Alarico tributus fuerat, præcipue memoratur. How Ætius was hostage to the Goths & Hunns is related by Frigeridus, who when he had mentioned that Theodosius emperor of the east had sent grievous commands to Iohn, who after the death of Honorius had usurped the crown of the western empire, he subjoy|i|ns: Iis permotus Iohannes, Ætium id tempus curam palatij gerentem cum ingenti auri pondere ad Chunnos transmisit, nos|t|os sibi obsidiatûs sui tempore & familiari amicitia devinctos — And a little after: Ætius tribus annis Alarici obses, d\e/hinc Chunnorum, postea Carpilionis gener ex Comite domesticorum et Ioannis Cura palatij. Now Bucher shews that Ætius was hostage to Alaric till the year 410, when <22r> Alaric died, & to the Hunns between the years 411 & 415, & son in law to Carpilio about the year 417 or 418, & Curopalates to Iohn about the end of the year 423. Whence it's probable that he became hostage to the Hunns about the year 412 or 413, when Honorius made leagues with almost all the barbarous nations, & granted them seats. But I had rather say with Sigonius, that Ætius became hostage to Alaric A.C. 403. It's further manifest out of Bucher Prosper, that the Hunns were in quiet possession of Pannonia in the year 432. For in the first book of Eusebius's Chronicle Prosper writes: Anno decimo post obitum Honorij, cum ad Chunnorum gentem cui tunc Rugila præerat; post prælium cum Bonifacio se Ætius contulisset, impetrato aduxilio ad Romanorum \solum/ regreditur. And in the second book: Ætio et Valerio Coss: Ætius deposita potestate profugus ad Hunnos in Pannonia pervenit, quorum amicitia auxilioqꝫ usus pacem principum interpellatæ potestatis obtinuit. Hereby it appears that at this time Rugila (or as Maximus calls him, Rechilla) reigned over the Hunns in Pannonia; & that Pannonia was not now so much as \accounted/ within the soils of the Empire, being formerly granted away to the Hunns; & that these were the very same body of Hunns with which Ætius had, in the time of his being an hostage, contracted friendship: by virtue of which, as he sollicited them before to the aid of Iohn the tyrant A.C. 424, so now he procured their intercession for himself with the Emperor. Octar died A.C. 430; for Socrates tells us, that ^[43]|[|about that time the Burgundians having been newly vext by the Hunns, upon intelligence of Octar's death seeing them without a leader, set upon them suddenly with so much success^[44], that 3000 Burgundians slew 10000 Hunns. Of Rugila's being now king in Pannonia you have heard already. He died A.C. 433, & was succeeded by Bleda, as Prosper & Maximus inform us. This Bleda with his his brother Attila were before this time kings of the Hunns beyond the Danube, their father Munzuc's kingdom being divided between them; & now they united the kingdom of Pannonia to their own. Whence Paulus Diaconus saith, they \did/ regnum int\r/a Pannoniam Daciamqꝫ gerere. In the year 441, they began to invade the Empire a fresh, adding to the Pannonian forces new & great a{illeg}|rm|ies from Scythia. But this war was presently composed. And then Attila seing Bleda inclined to peace, slew him A.C. 444, inherited his dominions, & invaded the Empire a fresh. At length after various great warrs with the Romans, Attila perished A.C. 454; & his sons quarrelling about his dominions, gave occasion to the Gepides, Ostrogoths & other nations who were their subjects, to rebell & make war upon them. And t|T|he same year the Ostrogoths had seats granted to them in Pannonia, by the Emperors Mar\c/ian & Valentinian; & with the Romans ejected the Hunns out of Pannonia, soon after the death of Attila, as all historians agree. This ejection was in the reign of Avitus, as \is/ mentioned in the Chronicum Boiorum, & in Sidonius, Carm. 7 in Avitum, which speaks thus of that Emperor

The Poet means, that by the coming of Avitus the Hunns yielded more easily to the Goths. This was written by Sidonius in the beginning of the reign of Avitus: And his reign began in the end of the year 455, & lasted not one full year.

Iornandes tells us: Duodecimo anno regni Walliæ Wa|l|liæ post pene quinquaginta annos invasa Pannonia, Hunni a Romanis & Gothis pulsi sunt. And Marcelline: Hier|i|o et Ardaburio Coss. Pannoniæ quæ per quinquata {sic} annos ab Hunnis retinebantur, a Romanis receptæ sunt. Whence it should seem that the Hunns invaded & held Pannonia from the year 378 or 379 to the year 427, & then were driven out of it. But this is a plane mistake: For it is certain that the Emperor Theodosius left the Empire entire. And we have shewed out of Prosper, that the Hunns were in quiet possession of Pannonia in the year 432. The v|V|isigoths in those days had nothing to do with Pannonia, & the Ostrogoths continued subject to the Hunns till the death of Attila, A.C. 454; & Wallia king of the Visigoths <23r> did not reign twelve years. He began his reign in the end of the year 415, reigned three years, & was slain A.C. 419, as Idacius, Isidorus, & the Spanish manuscripts Chronicles seen by Grotius testify. And Olympiodorus, who produceth his history only to the year 425, sets down therein the death of Valia king of the Visigoths, & conjoy|i|ns it with that of Constantius w\h/ich happened A.C. 420. Wherefore the Valia of Iornandes, who reigned at the least twelve years, is some other king. And I suspect that this name hath been put by mistake for Valamir king of the Ostrogoths: For For the action recorded was of the Romans & Ostrogoths driving the Huns out of Pannonia after the death of Attila; And its is not likely that the \historian would referr the/ history of the Ostrogoths to the reign years of the Visigothic kings. This action happened in the end of the year 455, w^ch I take to be the twelft|h|-year of Valamir in Pannonia, & which was almost fifty years after the year 406, in which the Hunns succeeded the Vandals & Alans in Pannonia. Vpon the ceasing of the line of Hunnimund the son of Hermaneric, the Ostrogoths lived without kings of their own nation about forty years together, being subject to the Hunns. And when Alaric began to make war upon the Romans, w^ch was in the year 444, he made Valamir, with his brothers Theodemir & Videmir the grandsons of Vinethar, captains or kings of the|se| so Ostrogoths under him. And in the twelft|h| year of Valamir's reign dated from thence, the Hunns were driven out of Pannonia.

Yet the Hunns were not so ejected, but that they had further contests with the Romans, till the head of Denfix the son of Attila, A.C. 469, (in the Consulship of Zeno & Marcian as Marcelline relates) was carried to Constantinople. Nor we{illeg}|r|e the|y| yet tota\l/ly ejected the empire: For besides their reliques in Pannonia, Sigonius tells us, that when the emperors Mar\c/ian & Valentinian granted Pannonia to the Goths, (which was in the year 454) they granted part of Illyricum to some of the Hunns & Sarmatans. And in the year 526, when the Lombards removing into Pannonia made warr there with the Gepides, the Avares (a part of the Hunns, who had now taken the name of Avares from one of their kings) assisted the Lombards in that war; & the Lombards afterwards, when they went into Italy, left their seats in Pannonia to the Avares in recompence of their friendship. And f|F|rom that time the Hunns grew again very powerfull, their kings (whom they called Chagan) troubling the empire very much in the reigns of the Emperors Mauritirus, Phocas, & Heraclius. And this is the original of the present kingdom of Hungary, which from these Avares & other Hunns mixed together took the name of Hun-Avaria, & by contraction Hungary.

9. The Lombards, before they came over the Danube, were commanded by two Captains, Ibor & Ayon: after whose death they had kings, Agilmundus, Lamisso, Lechu, Hildehoc, Gudehoc, Claffo, Tato, Wacho, Walter, Audoin, Alboin, Cleophis, &c. Agilmundus was the son of Ai|y|on; {illeg}|&| became their king (according to Prosper) in the Consulship of Honorius & Theodosius A.C. 389, & reigned 33 years, according to Paulus Warnefridus, & was slain in battel by the Bulgar\ian/s. Prosper places his death in the Consulship of Marinianus & Asclepiadorus, A.C. 423. Lamisso routed the Bulgar|ian|s, & reigned the|r|ee years, & Lechu almost forty. Gudehoc was contemporary to Odoacer king of the Heruli in Italy, & led his people from Pannonia into Rugia, a country on the north side of Noricum next beyond the Danube; from whence Odoacer then carried his people into Italy. Tato overthrew the kingdom of the Heruli beyond the Danube. And Wacho conquered the Suevians, a kingdom then bounded on the east by Bavaria, on the west by France, & on the south by the Burgundians. Audoin returned into Pannonia A.C. 526, & there overcame the Gepides. Alboin A.C. 551 overthrew the kingdom of the Gepides, & slew their king Chunnimundus;|:| & A.C. 563 \he/ assisted the Greek emperor against Totila king of the Ostrogoths in Italy; & A.C. 568 led his people out of Pann{illeg}|o|nia into Lombardy, where they reigned till the year 774.

<24r>

According to Paulus Diaconus, the Lombards with many other Gothic nations came into the Empire from beyond the Danube in the reign of Arcadius & Honorius, that is, between the years 395 & 408. But they might come in a little earlier. For we are told that the Lombards, under their captains Ibor & Ayon, beat the Vandals in battel; & Prosper placeth this victory in the Consulship of Ausonius & Olybrius, that is, A.C. 379. Before this year war the Vandals had remained quiet forty years in the seats granted to them in Pannonia by Constantine the great. And therefore if these were the same Vandals, this war was |must have been| in Pannonia; & might be occasioned by the coming of the Lombards over the Danube into Pannonia a year or two before the battel; & |might \must have/| put an end to that quiet which had lasted forty years. And after Gratian & Theodosius had quet|ie|ted the barbarians, they might either retire over the Danube, or continue quiet under the Romans till the death of Theodosius; & then either invade the Empire anew, or throw off all subjection to it. By their warrs, first with the Vandals & \then with/ the Bulgar|ian|s, a Scythian nation so called from the river Volga whence they came; it appears that even in those days they were a kingdom not contemptible.

10. These nine kingdoms being rent away, we are next to consider the residue of the western empire. While this ep|m|pire continued entire, it was the Beast himself: but the residue thereof is but \only/ a part of him. And \if/ this part be considered as a horn, the reign of this horn may be dated from the translation of the Imperial seat from Rome to Ravenna, which was in October A.C. 408. For then the E\m/peror Honorius, fearing that Alaric would beseige him in Rome if he staid there retired to Millain, & thence to Ravenna: & the ensuing siege & sacking of Rome confirmed his residence there, so that he & his successors ever after made made it their home. And a|A|ccordingly Ma\c/chiavel in his Florentine history writ|es,| that Valentinian having left Rome|,| translated the seat of the empire to Ravenna.

Rhætia belonged to the western Emperors\rs/ so long as that Empire stood; & then it descended, with Italy & the Roman Senate, to Odoacer king of the Herulij in Italy, & after him to The\o/deric king of the Ostrogoths & his successors, by the grant of the Greek Emperors. Vpon the death of Valentinian the second, the Alemans & Suevians invaded Rhætia A.C. 455. But I do not find that they erected any standing^[45] kingdom there: For in the year 457, while they were yet depopulating Rhætia, they were attaqu\ck/ed & beaten by Burto Master of the horse to the Emperor Majoranus; & I heare nothing more of their \invading/ Rhætia. Clodovæus king of France, in or about the yeare 496, conquered a kingdome of the Alemans, & slew their last king Ermeric. But this kingdome was seated in Germany, & only bordered upon Rhætia: For its people fled from Clodovæus into the neighbouring kingdome of the Ostrogoths under Theoderic.|,| And Theoderic \who/ received them as friends, & wrote & \a/ friendly letter to Clodovæus in their behalf. And by this means they became inhabitants of Rhætia, as subjects under the dominion of the Ostrogoths.

When the Greek Emperor conquered the Ostrogoths, he succ\ee/e|d|ed them in them in the kingdom of Ravenna, not only by right of conquest but also by right of inheritance, the Roman Senate ^[46]|[|still going along with this kingdom. And therefore we may reccon that this kingdome continued in the Exarchate of Ravenna & Senate of Rome. For the remainder of the western e|E|mpire went along with the Senate of Rome, by reason of the right wh{h}|i|ch this Senate still retained, & at length exerted, of chusing a new western Emperor.

I have now enumerated the tenn kingdoms, into which the western Empire became divided at its first breaking, that is, at the time of Rome's being besieged & taken by the Goths. Some of these kingdoms at length fell, & new ones arose: but whatever was their number afterwards, they are still called the ten kings from their first number.

<25r>

Chap. VI \7/
Of the eleventh horn of Daniel's
fourth Beast.

Now Daniel^[47] considered the horns, & behold there came up among them another horn, before whom three of the first horns were pluckt up by the roots; & behold in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, & a mouth speaking great things, & its look was more stout then its fellows, & it made war with the saints & prevailed against them:^[48] And one \who{illeg}/ stood by, & made Daniel know the interpretation of these things, told him, that ^[49]the ten horns were ten kings that should arise, & another [king] should arise after them, & be divers from the first [ten kings] & subdue three kings, & speak great words against the most High, & wear out the saints, & think to change times & laws, & that they should be given into his hands for a time times & half a time.^[50] Kings are put for kingdomes, as above; & therefore the little horn is a little kingdom. It was a horn of the fourth Beast, & rooted up three of his first horns; & therefore we are to look for it among the nations of the Latine Empire, after the rise of the ten horns. But it was a kingdom of a di{v}|ff|erent kind from the other ten kind|g|doms, having a life or soul peculiar to it self with eyes & a mouth. By its eyes it was a seer; & by its mouth speaking great things & changing times & laws, it was a a|P|rophet as well as a King. And such a Seer, a Prophet & a King, was the Church of Rome.

A Seer, Ἐπίσκοπος, is a Bishop in the litteral sense of the word; and this Church claims the universal Bishoprick.

With his mouth he gives laws to kings & nations as an Oracle; & pretends to infallibility, & that his dictates are binding to the whole world,\:/ which is to be a Prophet in the highest degree.

In the eighth century, by rooting up & subduing the Exarchate of Ravenna, the kingdom of the Lombards^[51], & the Senate & Dukedome of Rome, he acquired Peter's Patrimony out of their dominions; & thereby rose up as a temporal Prince or King, or horn of the fourth Beast.

^[52]In a small book printed at Paris A.C. 1689, & entituled;|,| An historical dissertation upon some coines of Charles the great, Ludovicus Pius, Lotharius, & their successors stamped at Rome, it is recorded, that in the days of Pope Leo X, there was remaining in the Vatican, & till those days exposed to public view, an Inscription in honour of Pipin the fat{illeg}e\he/r of Charles the great, in these words: Pipinum pium primum fuisse qui amplificandæ Ecclesiæ Romanæ viam apperuerit, Exarchatu Ravennate, & plurimis alijs oblatis; that Pipin the pious was the first who opened a way to the grandure of the Church of Rome, conferring upon her the Exarchate of Ravenna & many other oblations. In & before the reign of the Emperors Gratian & Theodosius, the Bishop of Rome lived splendidly; but this was by the oblations of the Roman Ladies, as Ammianus describes. After those reigns Italy was invaded by forreign nations, & did not get rid of her troubles before the fall of the kingdom of Lombardy. It was certainly by the victory of the sea\e/ of Rome over the Greek emperor, the king of Lombardy, & the Senate of Rome, that she acquired Peter's patrimony, & rose up to her greatness. The Donation of Constantine the great is a fiction, & so it the donation of the Alpes Cottiæ to the Pope by Aripert king of the Lombards. For the Alpes Cottiæ were a part of the Exarchate, & in the days of Aripert belonged to the Greek Emperor

The invocation of the dead, & veneration of their images, being <26r> gradually introduced in the 4^th, 5^th|,| & 6^th & 7^th centuries|, y^e| Greek Emperor Philippicus declared against the latter, A.C. 711 or 712. And the Emperor Leo Isaurus, to put a stop to it, called a meeting of Counsellours & Bishops^[53] in his Palace A.C. 726, & by their advice put out an Edict against that worship, & wrote to Pope Gregory the second, \II./ that a general Council might be called. But the Pope thereupon called a Council at Rome, confirmed the worship of Images, excommunicated the Greek Emperor, absolved the people from their allegiance, & forbad them to pay tribute, or otherwise to be obedient to him. And the people of Rome, Campania, Ravenna & Pentapolis, with the cities under them, revolted & laid violent hands upon their magistrates, killing the Exarch Paul at Ravenna, & laying aside Peter Duke of Rome who was become blind. And when Exhileratus Duke of Campania incited the people against the Pope, the Romans invaded Campania, & slew him with \his/ son Hadrian. Then a new Exarch, Eutychius, coming to Naples, sent some secretly to take away the lives of the Pope & the Nobles of Rome: but the plot being discovered, the Romand|s| revolted absolutely from the Greek Emperor, & took an oath to preserve the life of the Pope, & to defend their state, & be obedient to their authority in all things. Thus Rome with its Dutchy, including part of Tuscia^[54] & part of Campania, revolted in the year 726, & became a free state under the government of the \the senate of this/ city. And the authority of the Senate in civil affairs was hence absolute henceforward absolute, the authority of the Pope extending hitherto no farther the|a|n to the affairs of the Church.

At that time the Lombards^[55] also being zealous for the worship of images, & pretending to favour the cause of the Pope, invaded the cities of the Exarchate: & at length (viz^t A.C. 752) they took Ravenna & put an end to the Exarchate. And this was the first of the three kingdoms which fell before the little horn.

In the year 751 Pope Zechary deposed Childeric^[56], a slothfull & useless king of France, & the last of the race of Merovæus; & absolving his subjects from their oath of allegiance, gave the kingdom to Pipin, the Major of the Palace; & thereby made a new & potent friend. And his successor Pope Stephen III^[57] knowing better how to deale with the Greek Emperor the|a|n with the Lombards, went the next year to the king of the Lombards, to persw|u|ade him to return the Exarchate to the Emperor. But this not Succeeding, he went into France, & persuaded Pipin to take the Exarchate & Pental|p|olis from the Lombards, & give it to S^t. Peter. And accordingly Pipin A.C. 754 came with an army into Italy, & made Aistulphus king of the Lombards promise the surrender. But the next year Aistulphus, on the contrary, to revenge himself on the Pope, besieged the city of Rome. Whereupon the Pope sent letters to Pipin, wherein he told him that if he came not speedily against the Lombards, pro data sibi potentia aliend|a|ndum fore a regno Dei & vita æterna, he should be excommunicated. Pipin therefore, fearing a revolt of his subjects, & being indebted to the Church of Rome, came speedily with an army into Italy, raised the siege, besieged the Lombards in Papia^[58], & forced them to surrender the Exarchate & region of Pentapolis to the Pope for a perpetual possession. Thus the Pope became Lord of Ravenna, & the Ex\ar/chate, some few cities excepted; & the{illeg} keys were sent to Rome, & laid upon the confession of S^t Peter, that is upon his tomb at the High Altar, in signum veri perpetuiqꝫ dominij, sed pietate Regis gratuita, as the inscription of a coin of Pipin hath it. This was in the year of Christ 755. And henceforward the Popes being temporal Princes, left off in their epistles & Bulls to note the years of the Greek Emperors, as they had hitherto done.

After this the Lombards invading the Pope's co\u/ntries, Pope Adrian^[59] sent to Charles the great, the son & successor of Pipin, to come to his assistance. And accordingly Charles entered Italy with an army, invaded the Lombards, <27r> overthrew their kingdom, became master of their co\u/ntries, & restored to the Pope, not only what they had taken from him, but also the rest of the Exarchate which they had promised Pipin to surrender to him, but had hitherto detained; & also gave \him/ some cities of the Lombards, & ^[60]was mutually made Patricius by the Romans, & had the authority of confirming the elctions {sic} of the Popes conferred upon him. These things were done in the years 773 & 774. And this \kingdom of the Lombards/ was the second kingdom which fell before the little horn. But Rome, which was to be the seat of his kingdom, was not yet his own.

In the year 796, Leo III^[61] being made Pope, notified his election to Charles the great by his Legates, sending to him for a present, the golden keys of the Confession of Peter, & the Banner of the city of Rome: the first as an acknowledgment of the Pope's holding the cities of the Exarchate & Lombardy by the grant of Charles; the other as a signification that Charles should come & subdue the Senate & people of Rome, as he had done the Exarchate & the ^[62]|[|kingdom of the Lombards. For the Pope at the same time desired Charles to send some of his |[|Princes to Rome, who might subject to the Roman people to him, & bind them by oath in fide & subjectione, in fealty & subjection, as his words are recited by Sigonius. An anonymous Poet, as published by Boeclerus at Strasburg, expresseth it thus:

Hence arose a misunderstanding between the Pope & the city. And the Romans about two or three years after, by assistance of some of the Clergy, raised so great tumults against him, as gave occassion to a new state of things in all the West. For two of the Clergy accused him of certain crimes, & by \with/ an armed force of the Romans, seized him, stript him of his sacerdotal habit, & imprisoned him in a monastery. But by assistance of his friends he made his escape, & fled into Germany to Charles the great, & \to w^m he/ complained to him of \against/ \of/ the Romans for acting against him out of a designe of \to/ throwing off all authority of the Church, & \to/ recovering their ancient freedom. And i|I|n his absence his accusers with an armed \their/ forces ravaged the possessions of the Church, & sent the accusations to Charles. And before the end of the year Charles sent the Pope back to Rome with a large retinue. And t|T|he Nobles & Bishops of France who accompanied him, examined the chief of his accusers at Rome, & sent them into France in custody. This was in the year 799. And t|T|he next year Charles himself went to Rome, & upon a day appointed presided in a Council of Italian & French Bishops to hear both parties. But when the Pope's adve\r/saries expected to be heard, the Council declared that he who was the supreme judge^[63] of all men, was above being judged by any other the|a|n himselfe. And t|W|hereupon the Pope made a solemn declaration of his innocence before all the people, & by doing so was looked upon as acquitted.

A few days \Soon/ after, when \upon/ Christmas day, was arrived, the people of Rome, who had hitherto elected their Bishop, & reckoned that they & their Senate inherited the rights of the ancient \Senate &/ people of Rome, voted Charles their Emperor, & subjected themselves unto him in such manner as the old Roman Empire & their Senate were subjected to him the old Roman Emperors. And t|T|he Pope crowned him, & annointed him with holy oy|i|le, & worshipped him on his knees after the manner of adoring the old Roman Emperors; as the aforesaid Poet thus mentions:

<28r>

And the Emperor mutually |on y^e other hand,|^[64] took the following oath to the Pope: In nomine Christi spondeo atqꝫ polliceor Ego Carolus Imperator coram Deo et beato Petro Apostolo me protectorem ac defensorem fore hujus sanctæ Romanæ Ecclesiæ in omnibus utilitatibus quatenus divino fultus fuero adjutorio prout sciero poteroqꝫ. The Emperor was made Consul of Rome, & his son Pipin was crowned king of Italy. And henceforward the Emperor styled himself: Carolus serenissimus, Augustus, a Deo coronatus, magnus, pacificus, Romæ gubernans imperium, or Imperator Romanorum; & was prayed for in the Churches of Rome. And h|H|is image was henceforward put {illeg} upon the coines of Rome. And the enemies of the Pope, to the number of three hundred Romans & two or three of the Clergy, were sentenced to death; & the three hundred Romans were beheaded in one day in the Lateran fields; but the Clergy-men at the intercession of the Pope were pardoned & banished into France. And thus the right of the Roman Emperors, which had hitherto been in the Greek Emperors, was by this Act transferred in the west to the kings of France.

After these things Charles gave the City & {D}{u}tch Dutchy of Rome^[65] to the Pope, subordinately to himself as Emperor of the Romans; spent the winter in ordering the affairs of Rome, & those of the Apostolic sea & of all Italy, both civil & ecclesiastical, & in making new laws for them; & returned the next summer into France: leaving the city under its senate, & both under the Pope & himself. And hearing that his new laws were not observed by the judges in dictating the law, nor by the people in hearing it; & that the great men took servants from free men, & from the Churches & Monasteries, to labour in their vineyards, fields, pastures & houses, & continued to exact cattel & wine of them, & to oppress those that served the Churches: he wrote to his son Pipin to remedy these ab{illeg}|u|ses, \to/ take care of the Church, & see that his laws be executed.

Now the Senate & people & principality of Rome I take to be the third king whom the little horn overcame & even the chief {illeg} of the three. For this people elected the Pope {illeg} \& the Emperor & now now,/ by electing the Emperor & making him Consul, was acknowledged to retain the authority of the old Roman Emperor Senate & people. This city was the Metropolis of the old Roman Empire, represented in Daniel by the fourth Beast; & by subduing the Senate & people & Dutchy, it became the Metropolis of the little horn of that Beast, & completed Peter's Patrimony, which was the kingdom of that horn. And this victory was attended with greater consequences then any those over the other two kings. For it set up the western Empire, which continues to this day. It set up the Pope above the judicature of the Roman Senate, & above that of a Council of Italian & French Bishops, & even above all humane judicature; & gave him the supremacy over the western Churches & their Councills in a high degree. It gave him a look more stout then his fellows; so that when his new religion began to be established in the minds of men, he grappled not only with kings, but even with the western emperor himself. It is observable also, that the custome of kissing the Pope's feet, an honour superior to that of kings & Emperors, began about this time. There are some instances of it in the ninth century. Platina tells us, that the feet of Pope Leo IV were kissed according to ancient custome by all that \who/ came to him: & some say that Leo III began this custome, pretending that his hand was infected by the kiss of a woman. The Popes began also about this time to canonize saints, & to grant Indulgences & pardons. And some represent that Leo III was the fi\r/st author of all these things. And i|I|t is further observable, that Charles the great, between the years 775 & 796, conquered all Germany from the Rhe|i|ne & Danube northward to the Baltic sea, & eastward to the river Teis; & extended his conquests also into Spain as far as to the river Eber{,}|:| & by these conquests he laid <29r> the foundation of the new empire; & at the same time he propagated the Roman Catholic religion into all his conquests, obliging the Saxons & Hunns who were heathens, to receive the Roman faith, & distributing his northern conquests into Bishopricks, & granting tith\e/s to the Clergy & Peter\-/pence to the Pope: by all w^ch the Church of Rome was highly enlarged, enriched, exalted, & established.

In a small book printed at Paris 1689, & entituled,|,| An hs|i|storical dissertation upon some coins of Charles the great, Ludovicus p|P|ius, Lotharius, & their successors, stamped at Rome,^[66] there is a draught of a piece of Mosaic work w^ch Pope Leo III caused to be made in his Palace neare the Church of Iohn Lateran, in memory of his sending the standard or banner of the city of Rome curiously wrought, to Charles the great, & which still remained there at the publishing of the said book. In the Mosaic work there appeared Peter with three keys in his lap, reaching the pallium to the Pope with his right hand, & the banner of the city to Charles the great with his left. By the Pope is this inscription, SCISSIMVS D.N. LEO PP; by the king this, D.N. CAROLO REGI; & under the feet of Pet{illeg}|e|r this, BEATE PETRE, DONA VITAM LEONI PP, ET VICTORIAM CAROLO REGI DONA. This Monument gives the title of King to Charles, & therefore was erected before he was Emperor. It was erected when Peter was reaching the Pallium to the Pope, & the Pope was sending the banner of the city to Charles, that is, A.C. 796. The words above, viz^t Sanctissimus Dominus noster Leo Papa Domino nostro Carolo Regi, relate to the message; & the words below, viz^t Beate Petre, dona vitam Leoni Papæ & victoriam Carolo regi dona, are a prayer that in this undertaking God would preserve the life of the Pope, & give victory to the king over the Romans. The three keys in the lap of Peter signify the keys of the three parts of his patrimony, viz^t that of Rome with its Dutchy, which the \Pope claimed &/ was conquering, & those of Ravenna with the Exarchate, & of the territories taken from the Lombards; both which he had newly conquered. These were the three dominions, whose keys were in the lap of S. Peter, & whose Crowns are now worn by the Pope, & by the conquest of which he became the little horn of the fourth Beast. By Peter's giving the Pallium to the Pope with his right hand, & the banner of the city to the king w^th his left, & by naming the Pope before the king in the inscription, may be understood that the Pope was then reckoned superior in dignity to the kings of the Earth.

After the death of Charles the gre{t}|a|t, his son & successor Ludovicus Pius, at the request of the Pope^a[67], confirmed the donations of his Grandfather & father to the sea|e| of Rome. And in the confirmation he names first Rome with its Dutchy extending into Tuscia^[68] & Campania; & then the Exarchate of Ravenna, with Pentapolis; & in the third place, the territories taken form the Lombards. These are his three conquests, & he was to hold them of the Emperor for the use of the Church sub integritate, entirely, without the Emperor's medling therewith, or with the jurisdiction or power of the Pope therein, unless called thereunto in certain cases. This ratification the Emperor Ludovicus made under an oath. And as the king of the Ostrogoths, for acknowledging for acknowledging that ^[69]|[|he held his kingdom of Italy of |y^e| Greek Emperor, stamped the effigies of the Emperour on one side of his coins & his own on the Reverse; so the Pope made the like acknowledgement to the western Emperor. For the Pope began now to coy|i|ne money, & the coy|i|ns of Rome are hence forward found with the head of the Emperors (Charles, Ludovicus Pius, Lotharius, & their successors) on \the/ one side, & the Pope's inscription on the reverse, for many years.

<31r>

Sect. IV. \Chap. 8 –/
Of the power of the eleventh horn of Daniel's
fourth Beast to change times & laws.

In the reign of the Greek Emperor Iustinian, & again in the reign of the Greek Emperor Phocas, the Bishop of Rome obteined some dominion over the Greek Churches, but of no long continuance. His standing dominion was only over the nations of the western Empire, represented by Daniel's fourth Beast. And this jurisdiction was set up by the following Edict of the Emperors Gratian & Valentian. — ^[70]Volumus ut quicunqꝫ judicio Damasi, quod ille cum Concilio quinqꝫ vel septem habuerit Episcoporū, vel eorum qui Catholici sunt judicio vel Concilio condemnatus fuerit, si juste voluerit Ecclesiam retentare, ut qui ad sacerdotale judicium per contumeliam non ivisset: ut ab illustribus v|V|iris Præfectis Prætorio Galliæ atque Italiæ authoritate adhibitâ ad Episcopale judicium remittatur, sive a Consularibus vel Vicarijs; ut ad Vrbem Romam sub prosecutione perveniat. Aut si in longinquioribus partibus alicujus ferocitas talis emerserit, omnis ejus causæ edictio ad Metropolitæ in eadem Provincia Episcopi deduceretur examen. Vel si ipse Metropolitanus est, Romam necessariò, vel ad eos quos Romanus Episcopus judices dederit; sine delatione contendat. — Quod si vel Metropolitani Episcopi vel cujuscunqꝫ sacerdotis iniquitas est suspecta, aut gratia; ad Romanum Episcopum, vel ad Concilium quindecim finitimorum episcoporum accersitum liceat provocare; modo ne post examen habitum, quod definitum fuerit, integretur. This Edict was ma|nting|de in the ti|na|me of both Valens & Theodosius in the Title, was made in the time between their reigns, that is, in the end of the year 378, or in the beginning of the year following |379| \379/. It was directed to the Præfecti Prætorio {illeg}|It|aliæ & Galliæ, & therefore was general. For the Præfectus Prætorio Italiæ governed Italy, Illyricum occidentale & Africa; & the Præfectus Prætorio Galliæ governed Gallia, Spain, & Britain.

The granting of this Iurisdiction to the Pope gave occasion to several Bishops to write to him for his resolutions upon doubtful cases, & to his answering them by Decretal Epistles. And henceforward he gave laws to the western Churches by such Epistles. Himerius Bishop of Tarraco, the head city of a Province in Spain, writing to Pope Damasus for his direction about certain Ecclesiastical matters, & the Letter not arriving at Rome till after the death of Damasus, A.C. 384: his successor Siricius answered the Letter with a legislative authority, telling him of one thing: Cum hoc fieri — missa ad Provincias a venerandæ memoriæ prædecessore meo Liberio generalia Decreta prohibeant. Of another: Noverint se ab omni ecclesiastico honore, quo indignè usi sunt, Apostolicæ sedis auctoritate dejectos. Of another: Scituri posthac omnium Provinciarum summi Antistites quod si ultrò ad sacros ordines quenquam de talibus esse assumendum, et de suo, et de aliorum statu quos contra Canones et interdicta nostra provexerint, congruam ab Apostolica sede promendam esse sententiam. And the Epistle he concludes thus: Explicuimus, ut arbitror, frater charissime, universa quæ digesta sunt in quæ\e/relam: <32r> et ad singulas causas, de quibus ad Romanam Ecclesiam, utpote ad caput tui corporis, retulisti, sufficientia, quantum opinor, responsa reddidimus. Nunc fraternitatis tuæ animum ad servandos canones, et tenenda decretalia constituta magis ac magis incitamus ad hæc quæ ad tua consulta rescripsimus in omnium coepiscoporum perferri facias notionem; et non solum eorum qui in tua sunt diæcesi constituti, sed etiam ad universos Carthaginenses ac Bœticos, Lusitanos atqꝫ ^✝[71] Gallicos, vel eos qui vicinis tibi collimitant hinc inde Provincijs, hæc quæ a nobis sunt salubri ordinatione disposita, sub literarum tuarum prosecutione mittantur. Et quanquam statuta sedis Apostolicæ vel Canonum venerabilia definita, nulli Sacerdotum Domini ignorare sit liberum: utilius tamen, atqꝫ pro antiquitate sacerdotij tui dilectioni tuæ esse admodùm poterit gloriosum, si ea quæ ad te speciali nomine generaliter scripta sunt, per unanimitatis tuæ sollicitudinem in universorum fratrum nostrorum notitiam perferantur, quatenus et quæ a nobis non inconsultè perferantur sed providè sub nimia cautela et deliberatione sunt salubriter constituta, intemerata perm{illeg}|a|neant, et omnibus in posterum excusationibus aditus, qui jam nulli apud nos patere poterit, obstruatur. Dat. 3 Id. Febr. Arcadio et Bautone viris clarissimis Consulibus, A.C. 385. Pope Liberius in the reign of Iovian or Valentinian I, sent general Decrees to the Provinces, ordering that the Arians should not be rebaptized. And this he did in the favour of the Council of Alexandria, that nothing more should be required of them than to renounce their opinions. Pope Damasus is said to have decreed in a Roman Council, that tith\e/s & tenths should be paid upon pain of an Anathema; & that Glory be to the father; &c should be said or sung at the end of the Psalms. But the first Decretal Epistle now extant is this of Siricius to Himerius. And by this Epistle the Pope made Himerius his Vicar over all Spain for promulging his Decrees, & seing them observed. The Bishop of Sevill was also the Pope's Vicar sometimes; For Pope Simpli{us}|ci|us wrote thus to Zeno Bishop of Sevil: Talibus idcirco gloriantes indicijs, congruum duximus vicariâ Sedis nostræ te auctoritate fulciri: cujus vigore munitus, Apostolicæ institutionis Decreta, vel sanctorum terminos Patrum, nullatenus transcendi permittas. And Pope Hormisda^[72] made the Bishop of Sevill his Vicar over Bœtica & Lusitania, & the Bishop of Tarraco his Vicar of over all the rest of Spain, as appears by his Epistles to them.

Pope Innocent the first, in his Decretal Epistle to Victricius Bishop of Rouen in France, A.C. 404, in pursuance of the Edict of Gratian, made this Decree. Siquæ autem causæ vel contentiones inter Clericos tam superioris ordinis quam etiam inferioris fuerint exortæ, ut secundum Synodum Nicenam congregatis ejusdem Provinciæ Episcopis jurgium terminetur, nec alicui liceat (^✝[73] Romanæ Ecclesiæ, cujus in omnibus causis debet reverentia custodiri,) relictis his sacerdotibus qui in eadem Provintia Dei Ecclesiam nutu Divino gubernant, ad alias convolare Provincias. Quod siquis fortè præsumpserit; et ab officio Clericatûs summotus, & injuriarum reus judicetur. Si autem majores causæ in medium fuerint devolutæ, ad sedem Apostolicam sicut Synodus statuit, et beata consuetudo exigit, post judicium Episcopale referatur. By these Letters it seems to me that Gallia was at this time subject to the Pope, <33r> and had been so for some time, & that the Bishop of Rouen was his Vicar or one of them: For the Pope directs him to refer the greater causes to the sea\e/ of Rome, according to custome. But the Bishop of Arles soon after became the Pope's Vicar over all Gallia: For Pope Zosimus A.C. 417, ordeining that none should have access to him without the credentials of his Vicars, conferred upon Patroclus the Bishop of Arles this authority over all Gallia, by the following Decree

Zosimus universis Episcopis per Gallias et
septem Provincias constitutis.

Placuit Apostolicæ sedi ut siquis ex qualibet Galliarum parte sub quolibet Ecclesiastico gradu ad nos Romæ venire contendit, vel alio terrarum ire disponit, non aliter proficiscatur nisi Metropolitani Episcopi Formatas acceperit, quibus sacerdotium suum vel locum Ecclesiasticum quem habet, scriptorum ejus adstipulatione perdoceat: quod ex gratia statuimus quia plures episcopi sive presbyteri sive ecclesiastici simulantes (quia nullum documentum Formatarum extat, per quod valeant confutari,) in nomen venerationis irrepunt, et indebitam reverentiam promerentur. Quisquis igitur, fratres charissimi, prætermissa supradicti Formata, sive Episcopus, sive Presbyter, sive Diaconus, aut deinceps inferiori gradu sit, ad nos venerit: sciat se omnino suscipi non posse. Quam auctoritatem ubiqꝫ nos mississe {sic} manifestum est, ut cunctis regionibus innotescat id quod statuimus omnimodis esse servandum. Siquis autem hæc salubriter constituta temerare tentaverit sponte suâ, se a nostra noverit communione discretum. Hoc autem privilegium Formatarum sancto Patroclo fratri et coepiscopo nostro, meritorum ejus speciali contemplatione, concessimus. And that the Bishop of Arles was sometimes the Pope's Vicar over all France, is affirmed also by all the Diocess Bishops of the Diocess of Arles in their Letter to Pope Leo I. Cui id etiam honoris dignitatisqꝫ collatum est, say they, ut non tantum has Provincias potestate propriâ gubernaret, verum etiam omnes Gallias sibi Apostolicæ sedis vice mandata sub omni ecclesiastica regula contineret. And Pope Pelagius I, A.C. 556, in his Epistle to Sapaudus Bishop of Arles: Majorum nostrorum operante Dei misericordiâ, cupientes inhærere vestigijs et eorum actus divino examine in omnibus imitari: c|C|haritati tuæ per universam ^[74]|[|Galliam sanctæ sedis Apostolicæ, cui divinâ gratiâ præsidemus, vices injungimus.

By the influence of the same Imperial Edict, not only Spain & Gallia, but also Illyricum became subject to the Pope. Damasus made Ascholius, or Acholius, bishop of Thessalonica the Metropolis of Oriental Illyricum, his Vicar for hearing of causes; & in the year 382 Acholius being summoned by Pope Damasus, came to a Council at Rome. And Pope Siricius the successor of Damasus, decreed that no Bishop should be ordeined in Illyricum without the consent of Anysius the successor of Acholius. And the following Popes gave Rufus the successor of Anysius, a power of calling Provincial Councils: For in the Collections of Holstenius there is an account of a Council of Rome convened under Pope Boniface II, in w^ch were produced Letters of Damasus, Syricius, Innocent I, Boniface I, & Cælestine Bishops of Rome, to Ascholius, Anysius & Rufus, Bishops of Thessalonica: in which Letters they commend to them the hearing of causes in Illyricum granted by the Lord & the holy Canons to the Apostolick sea to thro|'|ughout that Province. And Pope Siricius saith in his Epistle to Arysius: Etiam dudum, frater charissime, per Candidianum Episcopum, qui nos præcessit ad Dominum, hujusmodi Literas dederamus ut nulla licentia esset, sine consensu tuo in Illyrico Episcopos <34r> ordinare præsumere, quæ utrum ad te pervenerint scire non potui. Multa enim gesta sunt per contentionem ab Episcopis in Ordinationibus faciendis, quod tua melius caritas novit. And a little after: Ad omnem enim hujusmodi audaciam co\co/mprimendam vigilare debet instantia tua, spiritu in te sancto fervente: ut vel ipse, si potes, vel quos judicaveris episcopos idoneos, cum literis dirigas, dato consensu qui possit in ejus locum qui defunctus vel depositus fuerit, Catholicum Episcopum vitâ et moribus probatum, secundum Nicænæ Synodi statuta, vel Ecclesiæ Romanæ, Clericum de Clero meritum ordinare. And Pope Innocent I saith in his Epistle to Anysius: Cui [Anysio] etiam anteriores tanti ac tales viri prædecessores mei Episcopi, id est, sanctæ memoriæ Damasus, Siricius, atqꝫ supra memoratus vir ita detulerunt, ut omnia quæ in omnibus illis partibus gererentur, Sanctitati tuæ quæ plena justiciæ est, traderent cognoscenda. And in his Epistle to Rufus the successor of Anysius: Ita longis intervallis disterminatis a me ecclesijs discat consulendum, ut prudentiæ gravitatiqꝫ tuæ committendam curam causasqꝫ, siquæ exoriantur, per Achaiæ, Thessaliæ, Epiri veteris, Epiri novæ, et Cretæ, Daciæ mediterraneæ, Daciæ ripensis, Mæsiæ, Dardaniæ et Prævali ecclesias, Christo Domino annuente, censeam. Verè enim ejus sacratissimis monitis lectissimæ sinceritatis tuæ providentiæ et virtuti hanc injungimus sollicitudinem: non primitùs hæc statuentes sed Præcessores nostros Apostolicos imitati, qui beatissimis Acholio et Anyssio injungi pro meritis ista voluerunt. And Boniface I. in his {illeg} Decretal Epistle to Rufus & the rest of the Bishops in Illyricum: Nullus, ut frequenter dixi, alicujus ordinationem citra ejus [Episcopi Thessalonicensis] conscientiam celebrare præsumat: cui, ut supra dictum est, vice nostrâ cuncta committes|im|us. And Pope Cælestine in his Decretal Epistle to the Bishops thro|'|ughout Illyricum, saith: Vicem nostram per vestram Provinciam noveritis [Rufo] esse commissam, ita ut ad eum, fratres carissimi, |quic|quid de causis agitur, referatur. Sine ejus consilio nullus ordinetur. Nullus usurpet, eodem inconscio commissam illi Provinciam. C\c/olligere nisi cum ejus voluntate Episcopus non præsumat. And in the cause of Perigenes, in the title of his Epistle, he thus enumerates the Provinces under this Bishop: Rufo et cæteris Episcopis per Macedoniam, Achaiam, Thessaliam, Epirum veterem, Epirum novam, Prævalin, et Daciam constitutis. And Pope Xistus in a Decretal Epistle to the same Bishops: Illyricanæ omnes Ecclesiæ, ut a decessoribus nostris recepimus, et nos quoqꝫ fecimus, ad curam nunc pertinent Thessa\lo/nicensis Antistitis, ut suâ sollicitudine, siquæ inter fratres nascantur, ut assolent, actiones distinguat atqꝫ definiat, et ad eum quicquid a singulis sacerdotibus agitur, referatur. Sit Concilium, quotiens causæ fuerint, quotiens ille pro necessitatum emergentium ratione decreverit. And Pope Leo I in his Decretal Epistle to Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica: Singulis autem Metropolitanis sicut potestas ista committitur, ut in suis Provincijs jus habeat|n|t ordinandi, ita eos Metropolitanos a te volumus ordinari; maturo tamen et decocto judicio.

Occidental Illyricum comprehended Pannonia prima & secunda, Savia, Dalmatia, Noricum mediterraneum, & Noricum ripense; & its Metropolis was Sirmium till Attila destroyed this city. Afterwards Laureacum became the Metropolis of Noricum & both Pannonias, & Salona the Metropolis of Dalmatia. Now the Bishops of Laureacum & Salona ^a[75] received the Pallium from the Pope. And Pope Zosimus, in his Decretal Epistle to Hesychius bishop of Salona, directed him to denounce the Apostolic decrees <35r> as well to the bishops of his own Province as to those of the neighbouring. The subjection of these Provinces to the sea\e/ of Rome seems to have begun in Anemius, who was ordeined bishop of Sirmium by Ambrose bishop of Millain, & \who/ in the Council of Aquileia subject to \under/ Pope Damasus, A.C. 381, declared his sentence in these words: Caput Illyrici non nisi civitas Sirmiensis: Ego igitur illius civitatis Episcopus sum. Eum qui non confitetur filium Dei æternum & coeternum patri, qui est sempiternus, anathema dico. The next year Anemius & Ambrose, & \with/ Valerian bishop of Aquilea, & Acholius bishop of Thessalonica with \&/ many others, went to the Council of Rome, which met for overruling the Greek Church by the majority of votes, & exalting the authority of the Apostolick sea\es/ as was attempted before in the Council of Serdica.

Aquileia was the second city of the western Empire, & was by some called the second Rome. It was the Metropolis of Istria, Forum Iulium, & Venetia; & its subjection to the sea|e| of Rome is manifest by the Decretal Epistle of Pope Leo I, directed to Nicetas bishop of this city; For the Pope begins his Epistle thus: Regressus ad nos filius meus Adeodatus Diaconus Sedis nostræ, dilectionem tuam poposcisse memorant ut de his a nobis authoritatem Apostolicæ sedis acciperes quæ quidem magnam difficultatem dijudicationis videntur afferre. And t|T|hen he sets down an answer to the questions proposed by Nicetas, & concludes thus: Hanc autem Epistolam nostram quam ad consultationem tuæ fraternitatis emissimus, ad omnes fratres & comprovinciales tuos Episcopos facies pervenire, ut in omnium observantia, data prosit authoritas. Data 12 Kal. Apr. Majorano Aug. Cos. A.C. 458. Gregory the great^[76] A.C. 591, cited Severus Bishop of Aquileia to appear before him in judgment in a Council at Rome.

The Bishops of Aquileia & Millain created one another; & therefore were of equal authority, & alike subject to the sea\e/ of Rome. For Pope Pelagius^[77] about the year 557)|,| testified this in the following words: Mos antiquus fuit, saith he, ut quia pro longinquitate vel difficultate itineris, ab Apostolico illis onerosum fuerit ordinari, ipsi seinvicem Mediolanensis et Aquileiensis ordinare episcopos debuissent. These words imply that the ordination of these two Bishops belonged to the sea\e/ of Rome. When Laurentius bishop of Millain had excommunicated Magnus, one of his Presbyters, & was dead, Gregory the great^a[78] absolved Magnus, & sent the Pallium to the new elected Bishop Constat|n|tius,\;/ & \whom/ the next year \he/ ^b[79] reprehended him of partiality in judging Fortunatus, & commanded him to send Fortunatus to Rome to be judged there: & f|F|our years after \he/ ^c[80] appointed the Bishops of Millain & Ravenna to hear the cause of one Maximus; & two years after, (viz^t A.C. 601)|,| when when Constantius was dead, & the people of Millain had elected Deusdedit his successor, & the Lombards had elected another, ^d[81]Gregory wrote to the Notary Clergy & people of Millain, that the authority of his Letters Deusdedit should be ordained, & that he whom the Lombards had orde|a|ined was an unworthy successor of Ambrose. Whence I gather, that the Church of Millain had continued in this state of subordination to the sea|e| of Rome ever since the day of Ambrose; For Ambrose himself acknowledged the authority of the sea\e/ of Rome: ^[82] Ecclesia Romana, saith he, hanc consuetudinem non habet, cujus typum in omnibus sequimur, & forman. And a little after: In omnibus cupio sequi ecclesiam Romanam. And in his Commentary upon 1 Tim. 3. Cum totus mundus Dei sit, tamen domus ejus Ecclesia dicitue cujus hodie rector <36r> est Damasus. And i|I|n his Oration on the death of his brother Satyrus, he relates how his brother coming to a certain city of Sardinia, advocavit Episcopum loci, perconitatusqꝫ est ex eo utrum cum episcopis catholicis hoc est cum Romana Ecclesia conveniret? And in conjunction with the synod of Aquileia A.C. 381, in a synodical Epistle to the Emperor Gratian, he saith: Totius orbis Romani caput Romanam Ecclesiam, atqꝫ illam sacrosanctam Ecclesiam Apostolorum fidem, ne turbari sineret, obsecranda fuit clementia vestra; inde enim in omnes venerandæ communionis jura dimanant. So then t|T|he Churches |therefore| of Aquileia & Millain were subject to the Sea\e/ of Rome from the days of the Emperor Gratian. Auxentius the predecessor of Ambrose was not subject to the Sea\e/ of Rome, & therefore |consequently| the subjection of the Church of Millain began in Ambrose. This Diocess of Millain conte|a|ined Liguria with Insubria, the Alpes Cottiæ & Rhætia; & was divided from the Diocess of Aquileia by the river Addua. In the year 844, the Bishop of Millain revolted \broke off/ from the Sea\e/ of Rome, & continued in this revolt \separation/ about 200 years, as is thus mentioned by ^✝[83] Signonius: Eodem anno Angilbertus Mediolanensis Arc\h/iepiscopus ab Ecclesia Romana parum comperta de causa descivit, tantumqꝫ exemplo in posterum valuit, ut non nisi post ducentos annos Ecclesia Mediolanensis ad Romanæ obedientiam auctoritatemqꝫ redierit.

The Bishop of Ravenna, (the Metropolis of Flaminia & Æmilia) was also subject to the Pope: For Pope Zosimus (A.C. 417)|,| excommunicated some of that Church the Presbyters of that church, & wrote a comm{illeg}|o|nitory Epistle about them to the Clergy of that Church as a branch of the Roman Church: In sua, saith he, hoc est, in Ecclesia nostra Romana. And w|W|hen those of Ravenna/,\ having elected a new Bishop, gave notice thereof to Pope Sixtus, ^b[84] the Pope set him aside, & orde|a|ined Peter Chrysologus in his room. And Peter Chrysologus in his room. And Peter Chrysologus in his Epistle to Eutyches, extant in the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon, wrote ^[85]|[|thus: Nos pro studio pacis & fidei, extra consensum Romanæ civitatis Episcopi, causas fidei audire non possumus. And Pope Leo I. being consulted by Leo Bishop of Ravenna about some questions, answered him by a Decretal Epistle A.C. 451. And Pope ^c[86]Gregory the great reprehending Iohn Bishop of Ravenna about the use of the Pallium, tells him of a p|P|recept of one of his Predecessors, Pope Iohn, commanding that all the Prive|i|leges granted by his Predecessors to the Bishop & Church of Ravenna should be kept. And^[87] t|T|his Bishop Iohn returned a submissive answer. And after his death Pope Gregory ordered a visitation of the Church of Ravenna, sent the pallium to his successor Marinian, as of ancient custome, & confirmed the privileges heretofore granted to this Church. Yet this Church revolted sometimes from the Church of Rome, but returned again to its obedience.

The rest of Italy, with the Islands adjacent, conteining the suburbicarian regions, or ten Provinces under the temporal Vicar of Rome/,\ (viz^{t 1}Campania ²Tuscia & Vmbria, ³Picenum suburbicarium ⁴Sicily, ⁵Apulia & Calabria, ⁶Brutij & Lucania, ⁷Samnium, ⁸Sardinia, ⁹Corsica, & ¹⁰Valeria,) constituted the proper Province of the Bishop of Rome. For the Council of Nice in their fift|h| Canon orde|a|ined that Councils should be held every half-ye spring & autumn in every Province; & according to this Canon, the Bishops of this Province met every half year at Rome. For i|I|n this sense Pope Leo I. applied this <37r> Canon to Rome in \a/ Decretal Epistle to the Bishops of Sicily, written Alippio et Ardabure Coss. A.C. 447. Quia saluberrime, saith he, a sanctis patribus constitutum est binos in annis singulis episcoporum debere esse conventus, terni semper ex vobis ad diem tertium Kalendarum Octobrisum Romam æterno consilio sociandi occurrant. Et indissimulanter a vobis hæc consuetudo servetur, quoniam adjuvante Dei gratia facilius poterit provideri ut in Ecclesijs Christi nulla scandala nulli nascantur errores cum coram Apostolo Petro semper in communione tractatum fuerit ut omnia Canonumqꝫ Decreta apud omnes Domini sacerdotes inviolata permaneant. The Provi{ce}|nc|e of Rome therefore comprehended Sicily, & \with/ so much of Italy & the neighbouring Islands as sent Bishops to the annual Councils of Rome; but extended not into the Provinces of Ravenna, Aquileia, Millain, Arles, &c those Provinces having Councills of their own. For t|T|he Bishops in every Proin|v|ince of the Roman Empire were co\n/vened in Council by the Metropolitan or Bishop of the head city of the Province, & this Bishop presided in the Council|,|\:/ & the Bishop of Rome did not only preside in his own Council of the Bishops of the suburbicarian regions, but also gave Orders to the Metropolitans of all the Provinces in the western Empire as their universal governour, as you may further perceive by the following instances

Pope Zosimus A.C. 417 cited Proculus Bishop of Marseil\le/s to appear before a Council at Rome for illegitimate Ordinations; & condemned him, as he mentions in several of his Epistles. Pope Boniface I. A.C. 419, upon a complaint of the Clergy of Valentia against Maximus a Bishop, summoned the Bishops of all Gallia & the seven Provinces to convene in a Council against him; & saith in his Epistle to them, that his Predecessors had done the like. Pope Leo I. called a general Council of all the Bishops Provinces of Spain to meet in Gallæcia against the Manichees & Priscillianists, as he mentions in his Decretal Epistle to Turribius a Spanish Bishop. And in one of his Decretal Epistles to Nicetas Bishop of Aquileia, he commands him to call a Council {oth} of the Bishops of that Province against the Pelagians, which might ratify all the Synodal Decrees w^ch had been made against them ratifyed by the Sea\e/ of Rome against this heresy. And in his Decretal Epistle to Anastasius bishop of Thessalonica, he ordeined that that Bishop should hold two Provincial Councils every year, & refer the harder causes to the Sea\e/ of Rome: and if upon any extraordinary occasion it should be necessary to call a Council, he should not be troublesom to the Bishops under him, but be content with two Bishops out of every Province, & not detein them above fifteen days. And i|I|n the same Epistle he descrip|b|es the form of Church Government then set up, to consist in a subordination a|o|f all the Churches to the Sea|e| of Rome: De qua forma, saith he, Episcoporum \quoque/ est orta distinctio, & magna dispositione provisum est ne omnes sibi omnia vindicarent, sed essent in singulis Provincijs singuli quorum inter fratres haberetur prima sententia, et rursus quidam in majoribus urbibus constituti sollicitudinem sumerent ampliorem, per quos ad unam Petri sedem unversalis {sic} Ecclesiæ cura conflueret et nihil usqꝫ a suo capite dissideret. Qui {illeg}ergo scit se quibusdam esse præpositum, non moleste ferat aliquem sibi esse præpositum. Sed obedientiam quam exigit etiam ipse dependat. Et sicut non vult gravis oneris sarcinam ferre, ita non audeat alijs importabile pondus imponere. These words <38r> sufficiently shew the monarchical form of governt|m|ent then set up in the Churches of the western Empire under the Bishop of Rome, by meanes of the Imperial Decree of Gratian, & the appeals & decretal Epistles grounded thereupon.

And t|T|he same Pope Leo having in a Council at Rome passed sentence against Hilary bishop of Arles, for what he had done by {a} a Provincial Council |in| Gallia, took occasion from thence to procure the following Edict from the western Emperor Valentinian III. for establishing more absolutely the authority of his Sea\e/ over all the Church|es| of the western Empire.

Impp Theodosius & Valentinianus AA. Aetio Viro illustri,
Comiti et Magistro utriusqꝫ militiæ et Patricio.

Certum est et nobis et imperio nostro unicum esse præsidium in supernæ Divinitatis favore, ad quem promerendum præcipue Christiana fides et veneranda nobis religio suffragatur. Cum igitur sedis Apostolicæ Primatum sancti Petri meritum, qui princeps est Episcopalis coronæ & Romanæ dignitas civitatis, sacræ etiam Synodi firmavit auctoritas, Ne quid præter auctoritatem sedis istius illicitum præsumptio attemperare nitatur. Tunc enim demum Ecclesiarum pax ubiqꝫ servabitur, si Rectorem suum agnoscat Vniversitas. Hæc cum hactenus inviolabiliter fuerint custodita, Hilarius Arelatent|s|is (sicut venerabilis Viri Leonis Romani Papæ fideli relatione comperimus) contumaci {illeg}|a|usu illicita quædam præsumenda tentavit, et ideo transalpinas Ecclesias abominabilis tumultus invasit, quod recens maxime testatur exemplum. Hilarius enim qui Episcopus Arelatensis vocatur, Ecclesiæ Romanæ urbis inconsulto Pontifice indebitas sibi ordinationes episcoporum sola temeritate usurpans invasit. Nam alios incompetenter removet {sic}, indecenter alios invitis et repugnantibus civibus ordinavit. Qui quidem, quoniam non facile ab his qui non elegerant, recipiebantur, manum sibi contrahebant {sic} armatam, & claustra murorum in hostilem morem vel obidione {sic} cingeban|t|t, vel aggressione reserabat, et ad sedem quietis pacem prædicaturus per ordinem religiosi viri Vrbis Papæ cognitione discussis, certa in eum ex his quos male ordinaverat lata sententia est. Erat quidem ipsa sententia per Gallias etiam sine Imperiali Sanctione valitura. Quid enim Pontificis auctoritate non liceret? Sed nostram quoqꝫ præceptionem hæc ratio provocavit. Nec ulterius vel Hilario (quem adhuc episcopum noncupare sola mansueta Præsulis permittit humanitas) nec cuiquam alteri arma miscere ecclesia{m}|s|ticis rebus arma miscere, aut præceptis Romani Antistitis liceat obviare. Ausibus enim talibus fides et reverentia nostri violatur Imperij. Nec hoc solum quod est maximi criminis submovemus: verum ne levis saltem inter ecclesias turba nascatur, vel in aliquo minui religionis disciplina videatur, hoc perenni sanctione discernimus, nequid tam Episcopis Gallicanis quam aliarum Provinciarum contra consuetudinem veterem liceat sine viri venerabilis Papæ Vrbis æteræ {sic} auctoritate tentare. Sed illis omnibusqꝫ pro lege sit, quicquid sanxit vel sanxerit Apostolicæ sedis auctoritas, ita ut quisquis Episcoporum ad judicium Romani Antistitis evocatus venire neglexerit, per Moderatorem ejusdem Provinciæ adesse cogatur, per omnia servatis quæ Divi parentes nostri Romanæ Ecclesiæ detulerunt, Aetij pater carissime Augusti. Vnde illustris et præclara magnificentia tua præsentis Edictalis Legis auctoritate faciet quæ sunt superius statuta servari, decem librarum auri multa protinus exigenda ab unoquoqꝫ Iudice qui passus fuerit Præcepta nostra violari. Divinitas te sevet {sic} per multos annos parens carissime. Dat. VIII Id. Iun. Romæ, Valentiniano A. VI Consule. A.C. 445. By this Edict the Emperor Valentinian enjoyned an absolute obedience to the Pope will of the Bishop of Rome though\ro'/out all the Churches of his Empire; & declares, that for the Bishops to attempt any thing without the Pope's authority is contrary to ancient custome, and that the bishops summoned to appear before his judicature must be carried thither by the Governour of the Province; & ascribes these privileges of the Sea|e| of Rome to the concessions of his dead Ancestors, <39r> that is, to the Edict of Gratian & Valentinian II. as above: by which recconing this dominion of the Church of Rome was now of 66 years standing. And if in all this time it had not been sufficiently established; this new Edict was enough to establish it in all the western Empire beyond all question.

Hence all the Bishops of the Province of Arles in their Letter to Pope Leo A.C. 450, in petitioning the Pope for a restitution of the privileges of their Metropolitan, say: Per beatum Petrum Apostolorum principem, sacrosancta Ecclesia Romana tenebat supra omnes totius mundi ecclesias principatum. And Ceretius, Salonius & Veranus, three bishops of Gallia, in their epistle to the same Pope Leo, say: Magna præterea & ineffabili quadam nos peculiares tui gratulatione succrescimus, quod illa specialis doctrinæ vestræ pagina ita per omnium ecclesiarum conventicula celebratur, ut vere consona omnium sententia declaretur merito illic principatum sedis Apostolicæ constitutum, unde adhuc Apostolici spiritus oracula reserentur. And Pope Leo himself, in his Epistle^[88] to the metropolitan bishops through|'|out Illyricum: Quia per omnes Ecclesias cura nostra distenditur, exigente hoc a nobis Domino, qui Apostolicæ dignitatis beatissimo Apostolo Petro primatum, fidei sui remuneratione commisit, universalem ecclesiam in fundamenti ipsius soliditate constituens.

^[89]|[|While this Ecclesiastical Dominion was rising up, the northern barbarous nations invaded the western Empire, & founded several kingdoms therein of different religions from the Church of Rome. But these kingdoms by degrees embraced the Roman faith, & at the same time submitted to the Pope's authority. The Francks in Gaul submitted in the end of the fift|h| Century, & the Goths in Spain in the end of the sixt|h|, & the Lombards in Italy were conquered by Charles the great A.C. 774: & between the years 775 & 794, the same Charles extended the Pope's authority over all Germany & Hungary as far as to the river Teis^[90] & the Baltic sea; & then set him above all humane judicature, & at the same time assisted him in subduing the last of the three kings whereby he became a temporal Prince above the Senate of Rome & reigned as a little horn of the fourth Beast|.| & \And by overcoming all those adversaries/ times & laws were henceforward given into his hand. the c|C|ity & Dutchy of Rome. By the conversion of the ten kingdoms to the Roman religion, the Pope only enlarged his spiritual dominion, & did not yet rise up as a horn of the Beast.^[91] It was his temporal dominion w^ch made him one of the horns: And this kingdom he acquired in the latter half of the eighth century, by subduing three of the former kings \horns,/ as above. And now being arrived at a \temporal dominion & a/ power above all humane judicature, he reigned ^[92] with a look more stout the|a|n his fellows, & times & laws were henceforward given into his hands, for a time times & half a time, or times three times & an half; that is, for 1260 solar years, recconing a time for a Calendar year of 360 days, & a day for a solar year. After which the judgment is to sit, & they shall take away his dominion^[93] (not at once, but by degrees) to consume, & to destroy it unto the end. And the kingdom & dominion, & greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven shall (by degrees) be given unto the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, & all dominions shall serve & obey him.^[94]

<40r>

Sect. V. |Chap. 9|
Of the kingdoms represented in Daniel
by the Ram & the He-Goat.

The second & third Empires, represented by the Bear & Leopard, are again represented by the Ram & He-Goat; but with this difference, that the Ram represents the kingdoms of the Medes & Persians from the beginning of the four Empires, & the Goat represents the kingdom of the Greeks to the end of them. And b|B|y this means, under the type of the Ram & He-Goat, the times of all four Empires are again described: I lifted up mine eyes, saith Daniel,^[95] & saw, & behold there stood before the river [Vlai] a Ram w^ch had two horns, & the two horns were high, but one was higher the|a|n the other, & the higher came up last. — And the Ram having two horns, are the kings of Media & Persia: not two persons but two kingdoms, the kingdoms of Media & Persia; & the kingdom of Persia was the higher horn & came up last. The kingdom of Persia rose up, when Cyrus having newly conquered Babylon, revolted from Darius king of the Medes, & beat him at Pasargadæ, & set up the Persians above the Medes. This was the horn w^ch came up last. And the horn w^ch came up first was the kingdom of the Medes, from the time that Cyaxeres & Nebuchadnezzar overthrew Nine|i|veh, & shared the Empire of the Assyrians between them. The Empires of Media & Babylon were contemporary, & rose up together by the fall of the Assyrian Empire; & the Prophesy of the four Beasts begins with one of them, & that of the Ram & He-Goat with the other. And as the Ram represents the kingdom of Media & Persia from the beginning of the four Empires; so the He-Goat represents the Empire of the Greeks to the end of those Monarchies. In the reign of his four horns great horn, & of the four horns which succeeded it, he represents this Empire during the reign of the Leopard: & in the reign of his little horn, w^ch stood up in the \latter/ time of the kingdom of the four, & at |after| their fall became mighty but not by he|i|s repre own power, he represents it during the reign of the fourth Beast.

The rough Goat, saith Daniel, is the king of Greece, that is, the kingdom; & the great horn between his eyes is the first king: not the first Monarch, but the first kingdom, that w^ch lasted during the reign of Alexander the great, & his brother Aridæus & two young sons, Alexander & Hercules. Now that [horn] being broken off, whereas four [horns] stood up for it; four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation [of the Greeks], but not in his [the first horn's] power. The four horns are therefore four kingdoms; & by consequence, the first great horn w^ch they succeeded is the first great kingdom of the Greeks, that which was founded by Alexander the great, An. Nabonass. 414, & lasted till the death of \his/ Son Hercules An. Nabonass. 441. And the four are those of Cassander, Lysimachus, &|A|ntigonus, & Ptolomy, as above.

And in the latter time of their kingdome, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king [or new kingdom] of <41r> fierce countenance, & understanding dark sentences, shall stand up: And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power. This king was the last horn of the Goat, the little horn w^ch came up out of the four horns, & waxed exceeding great. And t|T|he latter time of their kingdom w^ch was when the Romans began to conquer them, that is, when they conquered Perseus king of Macedonia, the fundamental kingdom of the Greeks. And at that time the transgressors came to the full: For then the High-priesthood was exposed to saile, & the Vessels of the Temple were sold to pay for the purchase; & the High-priest, with some of the Iews, procured a licence from the king Antiochus Epiphanes to do after the ordinances of the heathen, & set up a school at Ierusalem for teaching those ordinances. Then Antiochus took Ierusalem with an armed force, slew 4000 Iews, took as many prisoners & sold them, spoiled the Temple, interdicted the worship, commanded the Law of Moses to be burnt, & set up the worship of the heathen Gods in all Iudea. And i|I|n the very same year (An. Nabonass. 580) the Romans conquered Macedonia, the chief of the four horns. Hitherto the Goat began to {illeg}|w|as mighty by its own power, but hence forward began to be under the Romans. And Daniel distinguishes the times, by describing very particularly the actions of the kings of the north & south, (\those/ two of the four horns which bordered upon Iudea) untill the Romans began conquered Macedonia, & thenceforward only touching upon the main revolutions which happened within the compass of the nations represented by the Goat. And i|I|n this latter period of time the little horn was to stand up & grow mighty, but not by his own power.

The three first of Daniel's Beasts had their dominions taken away, each of them at the rise of the first \next/ Beast; but their lives were prolonged, & they are all of them still alive. The third Beast, or Leopard, reigned in his four heads, till the rise of the fourth Beast or Empire of the Latines; & his life was prolonged under their power. This Leopard reigning in his four heads, signifies the same thing with the He-goat reigning in his four horns: & therefore the He-goat reigned in his four head horns till the rise of Daniel's fourth Beast, or Empire of the Latines: And then its dominion was taken away by the Latines, but its life was prolonged under their power. The Latines are not comprehended among the nations represented by the He-Goat in this Prophecy: Their power over the Greeks is only named in it to distinguish the times in w^ch the He-Goat was mighty by his power, from the times in w^ch he was mighty but not by his own power. He was mighty by his own power till his dominion was taken away by the Latines; & after that, his life was prolonged under their dominion, & this prolonging of his life was in the days of his last horn: For in the days of this horn the Goat became mighty but not by his own power.

Now because this horn was a horn of the Goat, we are to look for it amongst the nations w^ch composed the <42r> body of the Goat. Among those nations he was to rise up & grow mighty: He grew mighty ^[96]towards the south & towards the east & towards the pleasant land; & therefore he was to rise up in the north-west parts of those nations, & extend his dominion towards Egypt, & Syria & Iudea. In the latter time of the kingdom of the four horns, it was to rise up out of one of them & subdue the rest, but not by its own power. It was to be assisted by a forreign power, a power superior to it self, the power w^ch took away the dominion of the third Beast, the power of the fourth Beast. And such a little horn was the kingdom of Macedon from the time that it became subject to the Romans. This kingdom by the victory of the Romans over Perseus king of Macedon, \Anno Nabonass 580,/ ceased to be one of the four horns of the Goat, & became a dominion of a new sort; not a horn of the fourth Beast, for Macedon belonged to the body of the third: but a horn of the third Beast of a new sort, a horn of the Goat w^ch grew mighty but not by his own power, a horn w^ch rose &|u|p & grew potent under a forreign power, the power of the Romans.

This|e R|omans, by the legacy of Attalus the last king of Pergamus, An. Nabonass. 615, inherited that kingdom, including all Asia minor on this side mount Taurus,\:/ & An. Nabonass. 683, 684 & 685 they conquered Armenia, Syria & Iudæa; & An. Nabonass. 718, they subdued Egypt. And by these conquests the little ^[97]|[|horn waxed exceeding great towards the south, & towards the east, & towards the pleasant land. And it waxed great even to the host of heaven; & cast down of the Host & of the starrs to the grownd, & stamped upon them,^[98] that is, upon the people & great men of the Iews. ^[99]Yea, he magnified himself even to the Prince of the Host, the Messiah, the Prince of the Iews, whom he put to death An. Nabonass. 780. And by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, & the place of his Sanctuary was cast down; viz^t in the warrs w^ch the armies of the eastern nations under the conduct of the Romans made against Iudea, when Nero & Vespat|s|ian were Emperors, An. Nabonass. 816, 817, & 818. And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, & it cast down the truth to the grownd, & it practised & prospered.^[100] This transgression is in the next words called the transgression of desolal|t|ion; & in Dan. XI.31 the abomination of desolation which maketh desolate; & in Matth. XXIV.15 the abomination of desolation, (spoken of by Daniel the Prophet,) standing in the holy place. And i|I|t may relate chiefly to the worship of Iupiter Olympius in his Temple built chiefly by the Emperor Hadrian, in the place of the Temple of the Iews, & to the revolt of the Iews under Barchochab occasioned thereby, & to the desolation of the Iews Iudæa which followed thereupon, all the Iews being thenceforward banished Iudæa upon pain of death. Then I heard, saith Daniel^[101], one saint speaking, & another saint said to him that spoke, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sarifice {sic}, & the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary & the Host to be trod\d/en under feet? And he said unto me, Vnto two thousand & three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel's days are years; & these years may perhaps be {illeg} recconed either from the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in the reign <43r> of Vespasian, or from the pollution of the Sanctuary by the worship of Iupiter Olympius, or from the desolation of Iudea made in the end of the Iewish war by the banishment of all the Iews out of their own country, or from some other period w^ch time will discover. Henceforward the last horn of the Goat continued mighty under the Romans, till the reign of Constantine the great & his sons: {illeg}|A|nd then by the division of the Roman Empire between the Greek & Latin Empires, it separated from the Latines, & became the Greek Empire alone, but yet under the dominion of a Roman family; & at present it is mighty under the dominion of the Turks.

This last horn is by some taken for Antiochus Epiphques, but not very judiciously. A horn of a Beast is nevertaken {sic} for a single person: It always signifies a new kingdom, & the kingdom of Antiochus was an old one. Antiochus reigned over one of the four horns, & the little horn was a fift|h| under its proper kings. This horn was at first a little one, & waxed exceeding great, under its proper kings & so did not Antiochus. It is described great above all the former horns, & so was not Antiochus. His kingdom on the contrary was weak, & tributary to the Romans, & he did not enlarge it. The horn was a king of fierce countenance, & destroyed wonderfully, & prospered & practised &|; that is, he| prospered in his practises against the holy people: but Antiochus was frighted out of Egypt by a mere message of the Romans, & afterwards routed & baffled by the Iews. The horn was mighty by another's power, Antiochus acted by his own. The Horn stood up against the Prince of the Host of heaven, the Prince of Princes; & this is the character not of Antiochus but of Antichrist. The Horn cast down the Sanctuary to the grownd, & so did not Antiochus; He left it standing. The Sanctuary & Host were trampled under foot 2300 days; & in Daniel's prophesy|ie|s days are put for years: but the profanation of the Temple in the reign of Antiochus did not last so many natural days. These were to last till the time of the end, till the last end of the Indignation against the Iews; & this Indignation is not yet at an end. They were to last till the Sanctuary w^ch had been cast down should be cleansed, & the Sanctuary is not yet cleansed.

This Prophesy of the Ram & He-Goat is repeated in the last Prophesy of Daniel. There the Angel tells Daniel^[102], that he stood up to strenghthen Darius the Mede, & that there should stand up yet three kings in Persia, [Cyrus, Cambyses, & Darius Hystaspis] & the fo\u/rth [Xerxes] should be far richer then they all; & by his wealth through|'| his riches he should stir up all against the realm of Greece. This relates to the Ram, whose two horns were the kingdoms of Media & Persia. Then he goes on to describe^[103] the horns of the Goat by the standing up of a mighty king, which should rule with great dominion, & do so according to his will; & by the breaking <44r> of his kingdom into four smaller kingdoms, & not to his posterity. Then he describes the actions of two of those kingdoms which bordered upon Iudea, viz^t the kingdoms of Egypt & Syria, calling them the kings of the south & north, that is, in respect of Iudea; & \he/ carries on the description till the latter end of the kingdom of the four, & till the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, when transgressors were come to the full. And i|I|n the eighth yeare of Antiochus, the year in w^ch Antiochus \he/ spoiled the Temple /prophaned the Temple prophaned\ \prophaned the Temple & set up the heathen Gods in all Iudæa,/ & the Romans conquered the kingdom of Macedon, the \prophetic Angel/ leaves off describing the affairs of the kings of the South & north, & {illeg}|b|egins to describe the|o||se| affairs of the Greeks under the dominion of the Romans, in these words. And after him^[104] Arms [The Romans] shall stand up, & they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength As ממלך signifies after the king, Dan XI.8; so here ממנו may signify after him: & so תן־תחאח|האחת| may signify after one of them, Dan. VIII.9. Arms are every where in these prophesies of Daniel put for the military power of a kingdom, & they stand up when they conquer & grow powerfull. The Romans conquered Illyricum, Epire & Macedon, in the year of Nabonassar 580; & 35 years after, by the last will & testament Attalus the last king of Pergamus, they inherited that rich & flourishing kingdom, that is, all Asia on this side mount Taurus: & 69 years after, they conquered the kingdom of Syria, & reduced it into a Province,|:| & 34 years after they did the like to Egypt. And b|B|y all these steps the Roman arms stood up over the Greeks. And after 95 years more, they by making war upon the Iews, they polluted the sanctuary of strength, & took away the dayly sacrifice, & [in its room soon after they] placed the abomination w^ch made [the Land] desolate. For this abomination was placed after the days of Christ, Matth. XXIV.15. In the 16^th year of the Emperor Hadrian, A.C. 132, they placed this abomination by building a Temple to Iupiter Capitolinus, where the Temple of God in Ierusalem had stood. For t|T|hereupon the Iews under the conduct of Barchochab rose up in arms against the Romans, & in the war had 50 cities demolished, & 985 of their best towns destroyed, & 580000 men slain by the sword: & in the end of the war, A.C. 136, |they| were banished Iudea upon pain of death; & thenceforward the land \hath/ remained desolate of its old inhabitants.

Now that the prophetic Angel passes in this manner from the four kingdoms of the Greeks to the Romans reigning {un}|ov|der the Greeks, is confirmed by from hence, that in the next place he describes the affairs of the Christians unto the time of the end, in these words:^[105] And they that understand among the people shall instruct many, yet they shall fall by the sword & by flame, & by captivity & by spoile many days. Now when they shall fall they shall be holpen with a little help, [viz^t in the reign of Constantine the great,] but many shall cleave to them with flatteries dissimulation. And of those of understanding there shall fall to try them, and to purge [them from the dissemblers] & to make white \un/to the time of the end. And a little after, the time of the end is said to be a time, times, & half a time: which is the duration of the reign of the last <45r> horn of Daniels fourth Beast, & of the Woman & her Beast in the Apocalyps.

<47r>

< insertion from higher up f 46r > Chapt. X
Of the Prophesy of the seventy Weeks

The Vision of the Image composed of four metals was given first to Nebuchadnezzar, and then to Daniel in a dream: and Daniel began then to be celebrated for revealing of secrets, Ezek. XXVIII.3. The Vision of the four beasts, and of the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, was also given to Daniel in a dream. That of the ram and the hee-goat appeared to him in the day time, when he was by the bank of the {illeg} river Ulay; and was explained to him by the prophetic Angel Gabriel. It concerns the Prince of the host, and the Prince of Princes: and now in the first year of Darius the Mede over Babylon, the same prophetic Angel appears to Daniel again, and explains to him what is meant by the Son of man, and by the Prince of the host, and the Prince of Princes. The Prophecy of the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven relates to the second coming of Christ; and that of the Prince of the host relates to his first coming: and this prophecy of the Messiah in explaining them relates to both comings, and assigns the times thereof.

^[106]|[|This Prophesy, like all the rest of Daniel's, consists of two parts, an Int introductory prophesy and an explanation thereof; the whole I thus translate and interpret.

Seventy Weeks &c # ^[107] < text from f 47r resumes >

The History
of
the four Monarchies
compared with
Sacred Prophesy

Chap. 1.
The History of the Persian Monarchy
compared w^th Daniel's weeks.

The Prophecy of Daniel's weeks I translate &
interpret thus.

{#} Seventy weeks are ^a[108]cut out upon thy people, & upon thy holy City, to finish transgressio{illeg}|n|, & ^b[109]to make an end of {s}ins, & to expiate iniquity, & to bring in everlasting righte{ou}sness & \c/to consummate the Vision & ^c[110]the ^{d}Prophet, & to {a}nnoint the most Holy.

Know also & understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to cause to return & to build Ierusalem that unto ^d[111]y^e Annointed the Prince, shall be the seven weeks.

Yet threscore & two weeks shall ^{d \e/[112]}it return, & the street be built & the wall; but in troublesome times & after the threscore & two weeks, y^e M{illeg}l \Annointed/ shall be cut off, & ^{d \e/[113]}it shall not be his, but the people of the Prince to come shall destroy the city & the sanctuary: & the end thereof shall be with a flood, & unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Yet shall he confirm the covenant w^th many for one week. And in half a week he shall cause the sacrifice & oblation to cease: & upon a wing of abominations he shall make it desolate.|,| And \even/ untill the consummation {e}{illeg} and that w^ch is determined shall be poured up{o}n the desolate.

Seventy weeks are cut out &{c} upon thy people, & upon <47v> thy holy City, to finish transgression, &c. Here by put{ting} a week for seven years |as in Gen. XXIX.27. 28,| are recconed 490 years fr{om} the time that the dispersed Iews should be reincorpo{rated} into ^a[114]a people & a holy city, untii|o|l the death & resur{rec}tion of Christ; whereby transgression should be finish{ed} & sins ended, & iniquity expiated, & everlasting righteo{usness} brought in, & this Vision accomplished, & the Prophet consummate, that Prophet whom y^e Iews expected; & the most Holy annointed, he who is therefore in the next words called the most Annointed, that is, the Messiah, or the Christ. For by joyning the accomplishment of the vi{sion} w^th y^e expiation of sins, the 490 years are ende{d} w^th y^e death of Christ. Now the dispersed Iews became a people & City when they first returned into a polity or body politick; & this was in th{e} seventh year of Artaxerxes \Longimagnus,/ when Ezra returned w^th a body of Iews from captivity, & revived the Ie{ws} worship, & by the King's commission created Magistrates in all the land, to judge & govern the people accordi{ng} to the laws of God & the King, Ezra 7.25. Till th{is} they were no polity: for There were but two re{turns} from captivity, Zerubbabel's & Ezra's; & in Zerubbabe{l's} they had only commission to build the Temple, in Ez{ra's} they \first/ became a polity or city by a government of t{heir} own. Now the years of this Artaxerxes began ab{out} |t|a|w||o| \or three/ month|s| or two after the summer solstice, & his seventh year fell in w^th y^e third year of the Iulian Period 80^th Olympiad; & the latter part thereof, w^th wherein Ezra went up to Ierusalem, was in the 4257^th year of the Iulian Period. Coun{t} the time from the|nce| death to y^e death of Christ, you will find it just 490 years. If you count in Iudaic years commencing in autumn, & date {y^e} recconing from y^e first autumn after Ezra's com{ing} to Ierusalem, when he put y^e King's decree in {ex}cution; the death of Christ will fall on the yea|r| of the Iulian Period 4747, anno Domini 34; & the weeks will be Iudaic weeks, ending with sabbatic{al} years: & this I take to be the truth. But if you had rather place y^e death of Christ in the year before as is commonly done, you may include the year {of} Ezra's journey in the recconing.

<48r>

Know also & understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to cause to return & to build Ierusalem unto the Annointed the Prince, shall be seven weeks. The former part of the Prophesy related to y^e first coming of Christ \being dated to his coming as a Prophet/; this being dated to his coming to be Prince or King, seems to relate to his second coming. There y^e Prophet was consummate, & the most holy annointed: here he that was annointed comes to be Prince & to reign. For all Daniel's prophesies reach to y^e end of the world; {&} there is scarce a prophesy in y^e old Testament {c}oncerning Christ, w^ch doth not in something or other relate to his second coming. If divers of the ancients as ^a[115]Irenæus, lib 5 ^b[116]Iulius Africanus, Hippolytus y^e martyr, {&} Apollinaris b|B|ishop of Laodicea, applied the half week to the times of Antichrist, why may not we by the same liberty of interpretation apply the half \seven/ weeks to y^e time when Antichrist shall be destroyed by the brightness of Christ's coming?

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.^[117] < insertion from lower down f 46r > Let the Messiah be considered as a Prophet in his lifetime, as an High Priest making intercession for us in the heavens from the time of his death and resurrection and ascension, {ac}cording to the following interpretation will be predicted all the main periods of time relating to him and his Kingdom, so that the interpretation is full. It determins the

<46v>

\Ⓧ/ The Israelites in the days of the ancient p|P|rophets, when the ten t|T|ribes were led in{to} captivity, expected a double return; and that at the first the Iews should build a new Temple inferior to Solomon's, untill the time of that age should be fulfilled and afterwards they should return from all the places of their captivity \&/ build Ierusa{lem} and the Temple gloriously, Tobit xiv.{5}|4|. 56: and to express the Glory and excellence of this City, it is figuratively said to be built of precious stones, Tobit xiii.16. 17. 18 Isa. liv. 11.12. Rev. xi; and calld the n|N|ew Ierusalem, the Heavenly Ierusalem {sic}, the Holy City, the Lamb's Wife, the City of the Great King, the Ci{ty} into which the Kings of the earth do bring their glory & honour. Now while {illeg}|s|uch a return from captivity was the expectation of Israel, even before th{e} times of Daniel, I know not why Daniel should omit it in this Prophesy. This part of the Prophesy being therefore not yet fulfilled, I shall not attempt a particular interpretation of it, but content my self with observing, th{at} as the 70 \seventy/ weeks and the sixty two weeks were Iewish {illeg} weeks, ending with sabattical years; so the seven weeks are the compass of a Iubilee and begin and end with actions proper for a Iubilee, and of the highest nature for which a Iubilee can be kept,|:| and that since the commandment to return and to build Ierusalem, precedes the Messiah the Prince 49 years it may perhaps come forth not from the Iews themselves, but from some other kingdom friendly to them, & precede their return from captivity, and giue occasion to it; and lastly, that this rebuilding of Ierusalem and the was{te} places of Iudah is predicted in Micah vii.11. Amos ix.11. 14, Ezek. xxxvi.11|33|. 35. 36. 38{.} Isa. liv.3. 11. 12 & lv.12. & lxi.4. & lxv.18, 21. 22. & Tobit xiv.5; and the return from the capti{vity} and coming of the Messiah and his kingdom are described in Daniel vii. Rev. xix. Acts I. Mat xxiv. Ioel iii. Ezek. xxxvi. xxxvii. and Isa. \Isa./ lx. lxii. lxiii. lxv. & lxvi and many other places of scripture. The manner I know not. Let time be the {in}terpreter.

Yet threescore & two &c^[118] < text from f 48r resumes > Yet threescore & two weeks shall it return, & the street be built & the wall, but in troublesome times: & after the threscore & two weeks, y^e Messiah shall be cut off, & it shall not be his, but the people of a Prince to come shall destroy y^e city & y^e sanctuary, &c. Having foretold both comings of Christ, & dated y^e last from the returning & building Ierusalem; to prevent the applying that to y^e building Ierusalem by Nehemiah, he distinguishes this from that, by saying that from this period to y^e Annointed shall be, not seven weeks, but threscore & two weeks, & this not in prosperous but in troublesome times; & at y^e end of these weeks the Messiah shall not be the Prince \^#/^[119] of the Iews, but be cut off, & the Principality not Ierusalem not be his, but the city & sanctuary be destroyed. Now Nehemiah came to Ierusalem in the 20^th year of this same Artaxerxes, while Ezra still continued there (Nehem. 12.36.) & found the city lying waste, & the houses & wall unbuilt (Nehem. {illeg}2.17.& 7.4) & finished y^e wall, saith Io <48v> sephus, in the 28^th year of the King the 25^t day of y^e month Elut (Nehem. 6.15) in ^d[120]y^e 28^th year of y^e King, that is in September in the year of the Iulian period 4277|8|. Count now from this year threescore & two weeks of years, that is 434 years, & the recconing will end in September in the year of y^e Iulian period 4712 that is at the birth of Christ in y^e 42^th year of Augustus & 28y^e of y^e victory {illeg} at Actium \conquest of Egypt/ two years before the vulgar account, where \the last year of w^ch recconing is the year in w^ch Christ was born/ \according to/ Clemens Alexandrinus, Irenæus, Eusebius, Epiphanius, \Ierome/ Orosius \Cassiodorus/ & other anc|t|ients|.| place i{illeg} For this was the general opinion of the anc|t|ients, till Dionysius Exiguus invented the vulgar account |in which Christs birth is placed two years later. If w^th some you reccon that Christ was born 3 or 4 years before y^e vulgar account, yet his birth will fall in the latter part of the last week, w^ch is enough.|. {sic} You may reccon by Iewish years inclusively & so place the birth of Christ 3 or 4 years before the vulgar account How after these weeks Christ was cut off, & the City & Sanctuary destroyed by the Romans, is well known.

Yet shall he confirm the covenant w^th many for one week. For he kept it (notwithstanding his death) till the rejection of the Iews, & calling of Cornelius & the Gentiles in the seventh year after his death passion. ||^[121]And in half a week he shall cause the sacrifice & oblation to cease, that is, by the war of y^e Romans upon the Iews; w^ch \war/ after some commotions began in the 13^th of year of Nero, A.D. 67 in spring, when Vespasian w^th an A|a|rmy invaded them, & ended in the 3|s|econd year of Vespasian, A.D. 70, in autumn, Sept. 7, when Titus took y^e City, having burnt y^e Temple 27 days before; so that is lasted three years & an half. ||^[122] Whe{illeg} \In reference therefore to these & other following wars he subjoyns/ And upon a wing of abominations he shall make it \cause/ desolation, even untill the consummation & that w^ch is determined be poured upon the desolate. The Prophets, in representing Kingdoms by Beasts & Birds, put their wings stretcht out over any country for their armies sent out to invade & rule over these countrie|y|s. And hence a wing of abominations is an army of fals Gods. For an abomination is often put in scripture for an fals God; as where Chemosh is called y^e abomination of Moab & Molech y^e abomination of Ammon. The meaning therefore is, that the \people of a Prince to come/ shall destroy the sanctuary, & abolish the daily ^[123]|[|worship of the true God, & invade \overspread/ y^e land w^th an army of fals Gods; & by setting up their \dominion &/ worship, & cause desolation to y^e Iews, untill the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. For Christ tells you, that the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel was to be set up by |in| the Romans times of the Roman Empire, <49r> Matt. 24.15.

Thus have you \predicted/ in this short prophesy, as it is here interpreted, \{|} a prediction of/ all the main periods relating to the coming of the Messiah, predicted: the time of his birth, that of his death, that of the rejection of the Iews, the duration of the Iewish war whereby \he caused/ the City & sanctuary \& {illeg}/ p{eri}shed {&} the to be destroyed, & the time of his second coming: {illeg}|&| so the interpretation here given is more full & complete & adequate to the designe, then if we should restrain it to his first coming only, as Interpreters usually do, we avoyd also the do{e}ing violence to y^e language of Daniel, by taking the seven weeks & sixty two weeks for one number. Had that been Daniel's meaning, he would have said sixty & nine weeks, & not seven weeks & sixty two weeks, a way of numbring used by no nation. In o^r way the years are Iewish Luni-solar years;\^a/^[124], as they ought to be; & the seventy weeks of years are Iewish weeks ending w^th sabbatical years, w^ch is very remarkable. For they end either with the \year of the/ birth of Christ or w^th his deat two years before y^e vulgar account, or w^th y^e year of his death, or with y^e seventh year after it: all w^ch are sabbatical years. Other's either count by Lunar years, or by weeks not Iudaic: &, w^ch is the worst, they ground their interpretations on erroneous Chronology, excepting the opinion of Funccius w^ch about y^e seventy weeks, w^ch is the same w^th the ours. For they place Artaxerxes Mnemon Ezra & Nehemiah in the reign of Artaxerxes Mnemon, & y^e building of y^e Temple in the reign of (Darius Nothus, & y^e weeks of Daniel from the|o|se two reigns.

The grounds of the Chronology here followed, I will now set down as briefly as I can. The Peloponnesian war &c.^[125]

<50r>

Chronological Observations upon the foregoing Interpretation.

1 On |y^e| years used by Daniel.

1. That y^e years used by Daniel are Iewish Lunisolar years.

<50v>

2 That Ezra & Nehemiah flourished under Artaxerxes Longimanus.

For making this appear \& clearing up the history of y^e Iews conteined in the books of \Ezra &/ Nehemiah/ I lay down the following considerations. First that the history book of Nehemiah from y^e 1^st year of 6|5|^t vers of y^e 7^th chapter to y^e ninth verse of y^e 12^th chapter i|w|as copied by Nehemiah out of the Chronicles of y^e Iews & conteins the histot|r|y of y^e Iews at their return from captivity under Zerubbabel in y^e first year of Cyrus. For this will appear by reading the place & considering that the men who who sealed the covenant in y^e 24^th day of y^e Fir seventh month were y^e very same w^th the men who came up w^th returned from captivity w^th Zerubbabel in y^e first year of Cyrusas you may perceive by comparing \the following comparison of/ their names.

Secondly I observe consider that {illeg} soon after these things the Temple was finished in y^e sixt year of Darius Hystaspis. For it was finished in the High Priesthood of Ieshua & Ieshua \was not long lived beyond the usual age of /old\ men. For he/ outlived not the age of his contemporaries. For in his days the first year of Cyrus the \chief/ Priests were Serajah, Ieremiah Ezra, Amariah, Mallach, Shiehaniah, Rehum, Meremoth, Iddo, Ginetho, Abijah, Iedaiah (Nehem 12) & their sons Merajah th all their eldest sons \of them all/ (Merajah y^e 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 Ieshuah. Nehem 12. & therefore the High Priesthood of Ieshua was but of an ordinary lenght.

<51r>

\{c}ommotions/ duration of y^e Iewish war, & \y^e time/ of his second coming. & so it is more full {illeg} & complete \& adequate to the designe/ then if we should restrain it to his first coming only, as interpreters usually do. besides that that their interpretation is made very harsh \In our way there is no violence done to the language, in theirs a very great one/ by joyning the seven weeks & sixty two weeks into one number, as if put for sixty & nine weeks. Had that been Daniel's meaning he would have gathered said sixty & nine weeks & not seven weeks & sixty two weeks: a way of numbering used by no nation. In our way the years are Iewish Luni-solar years as they ought to be & the \70/ weeks of years \& {illeg}/ are Iewish \The same may be said also of the/ weeks ending with sabbatical years; w^ch is very observable remarkable. For they end either w^th y^e birth of Christ or w^th his death or w^th y^e rejection of y^e Iews: all w^ch we place in sabbatical years. Others either count by Lunar years or by weeks not Iudaic. And w^ch is worst, they ground their computa interpretations on err{a}|o|neous chonology {sic}, excepting y^e opinion of Funccius about y^e 70 years w^ch differs from o^rs but in a year. \For they place ezra & Nehemiah in y^e reign of Artaxerxes Mnemon/ [The grounds of y^e Chronology here followed, I will set down as briefly as I can. {sic}

The Peloppo\n/nesian war began in spring \an 1 Olymp 87 as Diodorus, Eusebius & all authors agree. It began/ two months before Pythodorus ceased to be Archon (Thucyd. l. 2.) that is, in April, two months before y^e {illeg} end of y^e Olympic year, that is April.|.| And the years of this war are most certainly determined by the 4{illeg}|50| years distance of its beginning \first year/ from the transit of Xerxes \inclusively, (Thucyd. l. 2.) or 48 years exclusively. (Eratosth. apud Clem. All|e|x.)/ by the 69 years distance of its end, or 27^th year, from the beginning of Alexander in Greece; by the acting of the Olympic games in its \4^th &/ 12^th years; & 67 (Thucyd. l. 5) & by three eclipses of the Sun, & one of the moon, mentioned by Thucydides & Xenophon. Now by y^e unquestionable testimony of Thucydides, an unquestionable witness, tells us, that the news of the death of Artaxerxes Longimanus was brought \from |to| Ephesus, & from thence by some Athenians/ to Athens, in y^e 7^th year of this Pelopon\n/esian war, when y^e winter half year was running; suppose about mid-winter & & therefore |since the a month or two would be spent in bringing the news month or two before| he died an. 4 Olymp. 88, suppose about mid-winter, {illeg} an. Per. Iub. 4290 in the endof I.P. 4289 \{sup}pose a month or two before mid-winter; For so long the news would be in coming./. {sic} Now Ar after Xerxes reigned Artabanus 7 months, w^ch, saith Eusebius, in ordine annorum reputantur, in computing y^e years \duration/ of y^e Persian Monarchy \by years/ are recconned for a year. Then reigned \Now/ Artaxerxes Longimanus \reigned/ 40 years, by the consent of all Chronologers who reccon up y^e year of Artabanus apart. But Ptolomy who in his Canon \puts the reign of Artaxerxes 41 years. For he/ does not reccon <52r> <52r> the year of Artabanus apart but includes it in the reign of Artaxerxes \& therefo/ puts his reign 41 years. < insertion from between the lines of f 51r > Diodorus, Eusebius, Ierome, Sulpitius; & shall then almost or 41 according to Ptol. in {illeg} {illeg} Clemens Alexandr. l. 1. Strom. Chron: Alexandr. Abul-Pharagius, Nicephorus in <52r> cluding therein the reign of his successors Xerxes & Sogdian, as Abulpha\ra/jius informs us. < text from f 52r resumes > After Artaxerxes reigned his son Xerxes two months, & Sogdian 7 months; but their reign is not summ recconed apart in summing up y^e years of the Kings, but is included in y^e 40 \or 41/ years reign of Xerxes \Artaxerxes/. Omit these 9 months, & the precise reign{e} of Artaxerxes will be 39 years & {10} months. And therefore since his reign ended in \the beginning {illeg} of/ winter I.P. 4289, it began in \between midsummer &/ autumn, {illeg} I.P. 4260 4250.

The same thing I gather also thus. Cambyses began his reign spring I.P. 4185, & reigned 8 years, including y^e {illeg} seven \five/ months of Smerdes; & then Darius Hystaspis began in spring & reigned 3 I.P. 4193, & reigned 36 years, by y^e unanimous consent of all Chronologers. The reigne|{s}|\s/ {sic} of these th{illeg} two kings are determined by three eclipses \of y^e moon observed at Babylon, &/ recorded by Ptolomy; so y^t they |it| cannot be disputed. One was \of y^e more/ in y^e 7^th year of Cambyses, an. Nabonass 225 I.P. 4191, Iul. 16, hora una ante me{illeg} at 11 of y^e clock at night; in Babylon, another in y^e 20^th year of Darius, I.P. 4212, Nov. 19, at 11^h. 45′ {b} at night; a third in y^e 31^{th \st/} year of Darius, I.P. 4223, Apr. 25, at 11^h. 30′ at night. By these eclipses, & the Prophesies of Haggai & Zecchary compared together, it's manifest that his years began after the 24^th day of the 11^th month & {illeg} Iewish month, & before y^e 25^t day of April, & by consequence about March. Xerxes therefore Xerxes therefore began in spring I.P. 4229: F|f|or he began \Darius died/ in the fift|h| year after y^e battel at Marathon (as Herodotus lib. 7, & Plutarch mention) & that battel was in October I.P. 4225|4|, ten years before y^e transit battel at Salams|i|s. There Xerxes spent Xerxes therefore began w^th|in| less than a year after October I.P. 4228, suppose in y^e spring following: For he spent his first five years, & something more, in preparations for his great expedition against the Greeks; & this expedition was in the time of the Olympic games, an. 1 Olymp. 75, Calliade Athenis Archonte, {illeg} 28 years after y^e Regifuge, & Consulship of y^e first Consul Iunius Brutus, anno Vrbis conditæ 273, Fabio & Furio Coss. The passage of his^[126] \Xerxes's/ army over the hellespont began in y^e {illeg} end of the fourth year of y^e 74^th Olympiad, & (that is, in Iune) & I.P. 4234) & took up one month; & in autumn, after three months more, die Munychionis 16 \Plenilunio/ was y^e battel at Salamis, & a little after that an Eclips of the sun, w^ch by y^e calculation fell on Octob. 2. {illeg} His <54r> sixt|h| yeare therefore began a little before Iune (suppose in Feb. or March \spring/) an an. I.P. 4234 \& his first year in spring I.P. 4229, as above./ Now he reigned almost 21 years, by the consent of all writers|.| & therefore died in Add the seven months of Artabanus, & the summ will be 21 years & thre f{illeg} about 4 months or 5 months, w^ch end in the beginning of y^e between midsummer & {illeg}|a|utumn I.P. 425{illeg}|0|. And then begins the a|A|t this time therefore begins the reign of \his successor/ Artaxerxes, as was to be proved. T

The same thing is also confirmed by Iulius Africanus, who informs us out of former writers, that y^e 20^th year of this Artaxes {sic} |Artaxerxes|^[127] was y^e 115^th year from y^e firs beginning of Cyrus in Persia, & fell in with an. 4 Olymp. 83. It {illeg} It began therefore w^th y^e Olympic year, soon after the summer solstice, I.P. 4269,|.| & by consequence \Subduct 19 years, &/ his first year |will| began {sic} at y^e same time of y^e year I.P. 4250, as above.

His 7^th year therefore began after midsummer I.P. 4256; & the Iourney of Ezra to Ierusalem the full \the next was/ in y^e spring following was was in y^e f|s|pring following was {illeg} \fell on/ y^e beginning of I.P. 4257, as above.^[128]

< insertion from f 53r >

\^[129]Chap. XI
Of the Times of the Birth and Passion of Christ /SECT. I.\/

The times of the birth & passion of Christ, & \with/ such like niceties, being not material \to religion,/ were little regarded by the first Christians of y^e first age. They that \who/ began first to celebrate then, placed them in y^e cardinal periods of the year, as y^e birth of Christ on y^e winter solstice w^ch \in the Iulian Kalendar/ was then Decemb. 25, & \w^th/ y^e feasts of S^t Thomas, S^t Stephen, S^t Iohn, & S^ts Innocents as neare it as they could \{illeg} the feast of S^t Thomas on y^e 21y^e w^ch in y^e 4^th century {illeg} was the solstice, also/: the {sic} annunciation of y^e Virgin Mary, {on} {illeg} & y^e death of Christ on y^e 25^t of March, w^ch \when Iulius {illeg} Cæsar corrected y^e Calendar/ was then \at first/ the vernal equinox; the feast of Iohn Baptist on y^e 24^th of Iune, w^ch was the summer solstice; & the Feast of S. Michael on Sept. 29, w^ch was the autumnal equinox; & the birth of {illeg}|C|hrist on Dec 25 {illeg} \December/ y^e winter Solstice, w^ch was \Decemb 25/, {illeg}|w|^th y^e Feasts of S^t Stephen, S^t Iohn & S^t Innocents, as near it as they could \place them/ & y^e feast of S^t Thomas on Dec. 21 w^ch in y^e 4^th century was the solstice. And because y^e equinox\solstice/ rem in time removed from y^e 25^t|h| of December by degres to y^e 24^th, 25^th, 26^th & so 24^th, |y^e| 23^{th \d/}, y^e 22^{th \d/} & so on backwards, hence {illeg} some in the following centuries placed the death \passion birth/ of Christ on y^e Decemb 23, & at length on Decemb. 20: ^[130]|[|& \{illeg} for the same reason they seem to have/ set the feast of S^t Thomas on Decemb. 21, & that of S^t Matthew on Sept. 21. So also at the entrance of y^e sun into all \the/ the several sin{illeg}\the/ all the signes \in y^e Iulian Cal{illeg}|e|dar {sic},/ they placed y^e days of s{o} into y^e other Saints, as y^e conversion of Paul on Ian 25, when y^e sun entred {illeg} ♒,|, S^t| Matthias on Feb 25, when ☉ entred {illeg} \♓/; S^t Mark on Apr. 25, when ☉ entred ♉; Corpus Christi on May 25|6|, when ☉ entred ♊; S^t Iames on Iuly 25, when ☉ entred ♋; S^t Bartholomew on Aug. 24, when ☉ entred ♍; Simond & Iude on Octob. 28, when ☉ entred ♏. And if there were any other remarkable days in y^e Iulian Calendar they placed the birth or de saints on them, as \{S}^t Barnabas on Iune 11, where Ovid seems to place y^e feast of Vesta & Fortuna, & the goddess metuta; {S^t}/ S^t Philip & Iames on M{illeg} y^e first of May, a day dedicated both {illeg} |to y^e Bona| the Goddess of flowers, & still celebrated w^th her rights rites all w^ch shews that in fixing these days were fixed at pleasure w^thout any tradition ground in tradition. & S^t Barnabas on Iun 11 where Ovid seems to place y^e feast of Vesta, & Fortuna & y^e Goddess Matuta. \Goddess whom th{o} called by some magna mater deorum & magna mater \& by the/ Romans { go}ddess Bona Dea called Bona Dea, Fauna, Fortuna, magna & by other mater {D}{ea}, or mater De{illeg} magna Dea mater, & to y^e g|G|oddess of flowers Flora, & still celebrat{ed} w^th her rites./ All w^ch shews that these days were fixed \{in the} 1^st Christian Calend^rs by Astronomers Mathematicians/ at pleasure, w^thout any ground in tradition; {illeg} {illeg} |& that y^e {Ch}ristians took up w^ch what they found in the{illeg} calendars.| Neither was there any \certain/ tradition about y^e years of Christ. For y^e Christians who first began to enquire into these things, {as} Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Tertullian, Iulius Africanus, < text from f 54r resumes >