But it may possibly be objected, thirdly, that the expedition of Napoleon into Egypt and Palestine, though it be allowed in itself to have been an important circumstance in his career, yet is far from coming up to the prophetical description, in respect to the magnitude either of its objects or its results. But it may be asked, in reply, whether this objection be not founded on that misconception of the design of the prophecy, to which allusion has been already made, and on those erroneous views, which have been exposed, of this expedition in particular? What is that magnitude of objects and results, in connection with this expedition, which this objection would imply? Let us attend to the simple narrative of the facts as stated in the prophecy. It is there said, that this King, who "shall do according to his will," shall subdue the land of Egypt, and gain possession of its treasures of gold and silver; and that troubled by tidings out of the east and north, he shall go forth with great fury to destroy; that with this view he shall enter into the glorious land; by which diversion from his original purpose, Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon shall escape out of his hand; and that going forth with great fury to destroy, and having overthrown many cities, he shall plant the taber

nacle of his palaces in the glorious holy mountain. This is the sum of his predicted performances in this expedition; and every item of this statement Napoleon literally fulfilled. He did perform all that it was foretold of "the King" that he should perform in Egypt and Palestine. And on the supposition that all these particulars were mentioned beforehand for the express purpose of designating beyond a doubt this extraordinary person, whensoever he should have appeared, what more, it may be asked, needed Napoleon to have done, in order to prove himself the person in question, than to accomplish the predicted particulars? Or why should we object to admit him in that character, because on this occasion his exploits did neither assume that relative importance, nor lead to those ulterior consequences, with which we may have chosen in our own minds to connect them, but concerning which the prophecy itself is totally silent?

* The word rendered "palaces," means in the original language, not fixed habitations, but " pavilions." Bishop Newton in loco.

CHAP. XXII.

THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED.

A FOURTH objection, which may be urged against the interpretation, which has been here given to the prophecy, is this, that “it violates the chronological arrangement of the passage; that it supposes Napoleon's expedition into Egypt and Palestine, which took place at a very early stage of his career, to synchronise with that of the King,' which is described as occurring subsequently to the attacks of the kings of the south and north, and in fact as immediately antecedent and directly conducive to his disastrous end." In replying to this objection, it may be remarked that there is nothing in the structure of the prophecy itself, which precludes the idea of an unchronological disposition of its parts. In the four first verses of the passage (v. 36, 37, 38, 39.) there is evidently no attempt at any chronological arrangement of the particulars stated. They contain a collection of facts and circumstances, descriptive of the character and general proceedings of "the King," put together without any

pretence to order or succession, either as to time or place. In the next verse (40.), which predicts his change of fortune, and the instruments by which it will be accomplished, it is merely asserted, without any relation to the preceding statements, that these events will take place "at (i. e. in) the Time of the End:" while between this and the following verse (41.), in which the first mention of the Egyptian expedition is introduced, no necessarily consecutive connection exists. For though the original Hebrew has the common conjunction corresponding with the copulative in our own language," And he shall enter;" yet the use of this conjunction does not include in its meaning any necessity of this kind. In fact, the whole sense of the passage shows that these two verses must, in their construction, be separated from each other; for otherwise it must be inferred, that it is the "King of the North" of whom this expedition is predicated, and not "the King" to whom, on other accounts, it is so clearly to be assigned. The 42d verse describes his success and conquests in Egypt antecedently to his passing over into the Holy Land: which shows, unless it be contended that two similar invasions of Palestine are foretold, that the particulars stated in the 41st verse relate to the same events with those

predicted in the 45th; and, consequently, that no regular chronological history is given in this part of the prophecy; but that the fact of his entering into the glorious land having been previously stated as being one of the remarkable events of his life, the circumstances which led him to go forth with fury to plant his tabernacles in the holy mountain, are subsequently detailed.

In the same way, there is no necessity for connecting the End of "the King" with his expedition into Palestine, as if it took place in that country, or in consequence of that event. There is no direct intimation given in the text as to the former point; and with respect to the latter, though the words "yet he shall come to his end and none shall help him," do indeed follow the declaration of his

66

planting the tabernacle of his palaces in the glorious holy mountain ;" yet it is not necessarily to be inferred, that one of these events would be immediately dependent on the other. The contrast expressed by the word yet may be considered as extending to the whole of his former successful career, and as pointing out to us the signal catastrophe which finally awaited him, notwithstanding the power and pre-eminence to which he had been so wonderfully exalted.