Rev 12:3, 13:2, 4, 12 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 3. And there appeared another wonder in heaven . Represented as in heaven. Barnes on "Re 12:1" . That is, he saw this as occurring at the time when the church was thus about to increase. And behold a great red dragon . The word rendered dragon --δρακων-- occurs, in the New Testament, only in the book of Revelation, where it is uniformly rendered as here-- dragon : Rev 12:3-4,7,9,13,16-17, 13:2,4,11, Rev 16:13, 20:2 . In all these places there is reference to the same thing. The word properly means a large serpent; and the allusion in the word commonly is to some serpent, perhaps such as the anaconda, that resides in a desert or wilderness. See a full account of the ideas that prevailed in ancient times respecting the dragon, in Bochart, Hieroz . lib. iii. cap. xiv., vol. ii. pp. 428-440. There was much that was fabulous respecting this monster, and many notions were attached to the dragon which did not exist in reality, and which were ascribed to it by the imagination at a time when natural history was little understood. The characteristics ascribed to the dragon, according to Bochart, are, that it was distinguished (a) for its vast size; (b) that it had something like a beard or dew-lap; (c) that it had three rows of teeth; (d) that its colour was black, red, yellow, or ashy; (e) that it had a wide mouth; (f) that in its breathing it not only drew in the air, but also birds that were flying over it; and (g) that its hiss was terrible. Occasionally, also, feet and wings were attributed to the dragon, and sometimes a lofty crest. The dragon, according to Bochart, was supposed to inhabit waste places and solitudes, (compare Barnes on "Isa 13:22" ) and it became, therefore, an object of great terror. It is probable that the original of this was a huge serpent, and that all the other circumstances were added by the imagination. The prevailing ideas in regard to it, however, should be borne in mind, in order to see the force and propriety of the use of the word by John. Two special characteristics are stated by John in the general description of the dragon: one is, its red colour ; the other, that it was great . In regard to the former, as above mentioned, the dragon was supposed to be black, red, yellow, or ashy. See the authorities referred to in Bochart, ut sup ., pp. 435, 436. There was doubtless a reason why the one seen by John should be represented as red . As to the other characteristic-- great --the idea is, that it was a huge monster, and this would properly refer to some mighty, terrible power which would be properly symbolized by such a monster. Having seven heads . It was not unusual to attribute many heads to monsters, especially to fabulous monsters, and these greatly increased the terror of the animal. "Thus Cerberus usually has three heads assigned to him; but Hesiod (Theog. 312) assigns him fifty, and Horace (Ode II. 13, 34) one hundred. So the Hydra of the Lake Lerna, killed by Hercules, had fifty heads, (Virg. AEn. vi 576;) and in Kiddushim, fol. 29, 2, Rabbi Achse is said to have seen a demon like a dragon with seven heads."--Professor Stuart, in loc , The seven heads would somehow denote power , or seats of power. Such a number of heads increase the terribleness, and, as it were, the vitality of the monster. What is here represented would be as terrible and formidable as such a monster; or such a monster would appropriately represent what was designed to be symbolized here. The number seven may be used here "as a perfect number," or merely to heighten the terror of the image; but it is more natural to suppose that there would be something in what is here represented which would lay the foundation for the use of this number. There would be something either in the origin of the power; or in the union of various powers now combined in the one represented by the dragon; or in the seat of the power, which this would properly symbolize, Compare Barnes on "Da 7:6" . And ten horns . Emblems of power, denoting that, in some respects, there were ten powers combined in this one. Dan 7:7 ; Dan 7:8 Dan 7:20 , Dan 7:24 . There can be little doubt that John had those passages of Daniel ( Dan 7:7-8,20,24 ) in his eye, and perhaps as little that the reference is to the same thing. The meaning is, that, in some respects, there would be a tenfold origin or division of the power represented by the dragon. And seven crowns upon his heads . Gr., diadems . Rev 9:7 . There is a reference here to some kingly power, and doubtless John had some kingdom or sovereignty in his eye that would be properly symbolized in this manner. The method in which these heads and horns were arranged on the dragon is not stated, and is not material. All that is necessary in the explanation is, that there was something in the power referred to that would be properly represented by the seven heads, and something by the ten horns. In the application of this, it will be necessary to inquire what was properly symbolized by these representations, and to refer again to these particulars with this view. (a) The dragon . This is explained in Barnes on "Re 12:9" : "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world." So again, Rev 20:2 , "And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil." Compare Bochart, Hieroz . ii. pp. 439, 440. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the reference here is to Satan, considered as the enemy of God, and the enemy of the peace of man, and especially as giving origin and form to some mighty power that would threaten the existence of the church. (b) Great . This will well describe the power of Satan as originating the organizations that were engaged for so long a time in persecuting the church, and endeavouring to destroy it. It was a work of vast power, controlling kings and princes and nations for ages, and could have been accomplished only by one to whom the appellation here used could be given. (c) Red . This, too, is an appellation properly applied here to the the dragon, or Satan, considered as the enemy of the church, and as originating this persecuting power, either (1) because it well represents the bloody persecutions that would ensue, or (2) because this would be the favourite colour by which this power would be manifest. Compare Rev 17:3-4, 18:12,16 . (d) The seven heads . There was, doubtless, as above remarked, something significant in these heads, as referring to the power designed to be represented. On the supposition that this refers to Rome, or to the power of Satan as manifested by Roman persecution, there can be no difficulty in the application; and, indeed, it is such an image as the writer would naturally use on the supposition that it had such a designed reference. Rome was built, as is well known, on seven hills, (compare Barnes on "Re 10:3" ,) and was called the seven-hilled city, ( Septicolis ,) from having been originally built on seven hills, though subsequently three hills were added, making the whole number ten. See Eschenburg, Manual of Classical Literature , p. 1, % 53. Thus Ovid: "Sed quae de septem totum circumspicit orbem Montibus, imperii RomAE Deumque locus." Horace: "Dis quibus septem placuere colles." Propertius: "Septem urbs alta jugis, toti quae praesidet orbi." Tertullian: "I appeal to the citizens of Rome, the populace that dwell on the seven hills."--Apol. 35. And again, Jerome to Marcella, when urging her to quit Rome for Bethlehem: "Read what is said in the Apocalypse of the seven hills," etc. The situation of the city, if that was designed to be represented by the dragon, would naturally suggest the idea of the seven-headed monster. Compare Barnes on "Re 18:1" and to end of chapter. The explanation which is here given of the meaning of the "seven heads" is, in fact, one that is given in the book of Revelation itself, and there can be no danger of error in this part of the interpretation. See Rev 17:9 : "The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth." Compare Rev 12:8 . (e) The ten horns . These were emblems of power, denoting that in reference to that power there were, in some respects, ten sources. The same thing is referred to here which is in Dan 7:7-8,20,24 . Dan 7:24 . The creature that John saw was indeed a monster , and we are not to expect entire congruity in the details. It is sufficient that the main idea is preserved, and that would be, if the reference was to Rome considered as the place where the energy of Satan, as opposed to God and the church, was centered. (f) The seven crowns . This would merely denote that kingly or royal authority was claimed. The general interpretation which refers this vision to Rome may receive confirmation from the fact that the dragon was at one time the Roman standard, as is represented by the following engraving from Montfaucon. Ammianus Marcellius (xvi. 10) thus describes this standard: "The dragon was covered with purple cloth, and fastened to the end of a pike gilt and adorned with precious stones. It opened its wide throat, and the wind blew through it; and it hissed as if in a rage, with its tail floating in several folds through the air." He elsewhere often gives it the epithet of purpureus --purple-red: purpureum signum draconis, etc. With this the description of Claudian well agrees also:-- "Hi volueres tollent aquilas; hi picta draconum Colla levant: multumque tumet per nubila serpens, Iratus stimulante noto, vivitque receptis Flatibus, et vario mentitur sibila fiatu." The dragon was first used as an ensign near the close of the second century of the Christian era, and it was not until the third century that its use had become common; and the reference here, according to this fact, would be to that period of the Roman power when this had become a common standard, and when the applicability of this image would be readily understood. It is simply Rome that is referred to--Rome, the great agent of accomplishing the purposes of Satan towards the church The eagle was the common Roman ensign in the time of the Republic and in the earlier periods of the empire, but in later periods the dragon became also a standard as common and as well known as the eagle . "In the third century it had become almost as notorious among Roman ensigns as the eagle itself; and is in the fourth century noted by Prudentius, Vegetius, Chrysostom, Ammianus, etc.; in the fifth, by Claudian and others."--.Elliott, ii. 14, (1) "wonder" "sign" (a) "dragon" Rev 12:9

Revelation of John 12:3

Verse 3. And there appeared another wonder in heaven . Represented as in heaven. Barnes on "Re 12:1" . That is, he saw this as occurring at the time when the church was thus about to increase. And behold a great red dragon . The word rendered dragon --δρακων-- occurs, in the New Testament, only in the book of Revelation, where it is uniformly rendered as here-- dragon : Rev 12:3-4,7,9,13,16-17, 13:2,4,11, Rev 16:13, 20:2 . In all these places there is reference to the same thing. The word properly means a large serpent; and the allusion in the word commonly is to some serpent, perhaps such as the anaconda, that resides in a desert or wilderness. See a full account of the ideas that prevailed in ancient times respecting the dragon, in Bochart, Hieroz . lib. iii. cap. xiv., vol. ii. pp. 428-440. There was much that was fabulous respecting this monster, and many notions were attached to the dragon which did not exist in reality, and which were ascribed to it by the imagination at a time when natural history was little understood. The characteristics ascribed to the dragon, according to Bochart, are, that it was distinguished (a) for its vast size; (b) that it had something like a beard or dew-lap; (c) that it had three rows of teeth; (d) that its colour was black, red, yellow, or ashy; (e) that it had a wide mouth; (f) that in its breathing it not only drew in the air, but also birds that were flying over it; and (g) that its hiss was terrible. Occasionally, also, feet and wings were attributed to the dragon, and sometimes a lofty crest. The dragon, according to Bochart, was supposed to inhabit waste places and solitudes, (compare Barnes on "Isa 13:22" ) and it became, therefore, an object of great terror. It is probable that the original of this was a huge serpent, and that all the other circumstances were added by the imagination. The prevailing ideas in regard to it, however, should be borne in mind, in order to see the force and propriety of the use of the word by John. Two special characteristics are stated by John in the general description of the dragon: one is, its red colour ; the other, that it was great . In regard to the former, as above mentioned, the dragon was supposed to be black, red, yellow, or ashy. See the authorities referred to in Bochart, ut sup ., pp. 435, 436. There was doubtless a reason why the one seen by John should be represented as red . As to the other characteristic-- great --the idea is, that it was a huge monster, and this would properly refer to some mighty, terrible power which would be properly symbolized by such a monster. Having seven heads . It was not unusual to attribute many heads to monsters, especially to fabulous monsters, and these greatly increased the terror of the animal. "Thus Cerberus usually has three heads assigned to him; but Hesiod (Theog. 312) assigns him fifty, and Horace (Ode II. 13, 34) one hundred. So the Hydra of the Lake Lerna, killed by Hercules, had fifty heads, (Virg. AEn. vi 576;) and in Kiddushim, fol. 29, 2, Rabbi Achse is said to have seen a demon like a dragon with seven heads."--Professor Stuart, in loc , The seven heads would somehow denote power , or seats of power. Such a number of heads increase the terribleness, and, as it were, the vitality of the monster. What is here represented would be as terrible and formidable as such a monster; or such a monster would appropriately represent what was designed to be symbolized here. The number seven may be used here "as a perfect number," or merely to heighten the terror of the image; but it is more natural to suppose that there would be something in what is here represented which would lay the foundation for the use of this number. There would be something either in the origin of the power; or in the union of various powers now combined in the one represented by the dragon; or in the seat of the power, which this would properly symbolize, Compare Barnes on "Da 7:6" . And ten horns . Emblems of power, denoting that, in some respects, there were ten powers combined in this one. Dan 7:7 ; Dan 7:8 Dan 7:20 , Dan 7:24 . There can be little doubt that John had those passages of Daniel ( Dan 7:7-8,20,24 ) in his eye, and perhaps as little that the reference is to the same thing. The meaning is, that, in some respects, there would be a tenfold origin or division of the power represented by the dragon. And seven crowns upon his heads . Gr., diadems . Rev 9:7 . There is a reference here to some kingly power, and doubtless John had some kingdom or sovereignty in his eye that would be properly symbolized in this manner. The method in which these heads and horns were arranged on the dragon is not stated, and is not material. All that is necessary in the explanation is, that there was something in the power referred to that would be properly represented by the seven heads, and something by the ten horns. In the application of this, it will be necessary to inquire what was properly symbolized by these representations, and to refer again to these particulars with this view. (a) The dragon . This is explained in Barnes on "Re 12:9" : "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world." So again, Rev 20:2 , "And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil." Compare Bochart, Hieroz . ii. pp. 439, 440. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the reference here is to Satan, considered as the enemy of God, and the enemy of the peace of man, and especially as giving origin and form to some mighty power that would threaten the existence of the church. (b) Great . This will well describe the power of Satan as originating the organizations that were engaged for so long a time in persecuting the church, and endeavouring to destroy it. It was a work of vast power, controlling kings and princes and nations for ages, and could have been accomplished only by one to whom the appellation here used could be given. (c) Red . This, too, is an appellation properly applied here to the the dragon, or Satan, considered as the enemy of the church, and as originating this persecuting power, either (1) because it well represents the bloody persecutions that would ensue, or (2) because this would be the favourite colour by which this power would be manifest. Compare Rev 17:3-4, 18:12,16 . (d) The seven heads . There was, doubtless, as above remarked, something significant in these heads, as referring to the power designed to be represented. On the supposition that this refers to Rome, or to the power of Satan as manifested by Roman persecution, there can be no difficulty in the application; and, indeed, it is such an image as the writer would naturally use on the supposition that it had such a designed reference. Rome was built, as is well known, on seven hills, (compare Barnes on "Re 10:3" ,) and was called the seven-hilled city, ( Septicolis ,) from having been originally built on seven hills, though subsequently three hills were added, making the whole number ten. See Eschenburg, Manual of Classical Literature , p. 1, % 53. Thus Ovid: "Sed quae de septem totum circumspicit orbem Montibus, imperii RomAE Deumque locus." Horace: "Dis quibus septem placuere colles." Propertius: "Septem urbs alta jugis, toti quae praesidet orbi." Tertullian: "I appeal to the citizens of Rome, the populace that dwell on the seven hills."--Apol. 35. And again, Jerome to Marcella, when urging her to quit Rome for Bethlehem: "Read what is said in the Apocalypse of the seven hills," etc. The situation of the city, if that was designed to be represented by the dragon, would naturally suggest the idea of the seven-headed monster. Compare Barnes on "Re 18:1" and to end of chapter. The explanation which is here given of the meaning of the "seven heads" is, in fact, one that is given in the book of Revelation itself, and there can be no danger of error in this part of the interpretation. See Rev 17:9 : "The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth." Compare Rev 12:8 . (e) The ten horns . These were emblems of power, denoting that in reference to that power there were, in some respects, ten sources. The same thing is referred to here which is in Dan 7:7-8,20,24 . Dan 7:24 . The creature that John saw was indeed a monster , and we are not to expect entire congruity in the details. It is sufficient that the main idea is preserved, and that would be, if the reference was to Rome considered as the place where the energy of Satan, as opposed to God and the church, was centered. (f) The seven crowns . This would merely denote that kingly or royal authority was claimed. The general interpretation which refers this vision to Rome may receive confirmation from the fact that the dragon was at one time the Roman standard, as is represented by the following engraving from Montfaucon. Ammianus Marcellius (xvi. 10) thus describes this standard: "The dragon was covered with purple cloth, and fastened to the end of a pike gilt and adorned with precious stones. It opened its wide throat, and the wind blew through it; and it hissed as if in a rage, with its tail floating in several folds through the air." He elsewhere often gives it the epithet of purpureus --purple-red: purpureum signum draconis, etc. With this the description of Claudian well agrees also:-- "Hi volueres tollent aquilas; hi picta draconum Colla levant: multumque tumet per nubila serpens, Iratus stimulante noto, vivitque receptis Flatibus, et vario mentitur sibila fiatu." The dragon was first used as an ensign near the close of the second century of the Christian era, and it was not until the third century that its use had become common; and the reference here, according to this fact, would be to that period of the Roman power when this had become a common standard, and when the applicability of this image would be readily understood. It is simply Rome that is referred to--Rome, the great agent of accomplishing the purposes of Satan towards the church The eagle was the common Roman ensign in the time of the Republic and in the earlier periods of the empire, but in later periods the dragon became also a standard as common and as well known as the eagle . "In the third century it had become almost as notorious among Roman ensigns as the eagle itself; and is in the fourth century noted by Prudentius, Vegetius, Chrysostom, Ammianus, etc.; in the fifth, by Claudian and others."--.Elliott, ii. 14, (1) "wonder" "sign" (a) "dragon" Rev 12:9

Revelation of John 13:2

Verse 2. And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard. For a description of the leopard, Dan 7:6. It is distinguished for bloodthirstiness and cruelty, and thus becomes all emblem of a fierce, tyrannical power. In its general character it resembles a lion, and the lion and the leopard are often referred to together. In this description, it is observable that John has combined in one animal or monster, all those which Daniel brought successively on the scene of action as representing different empires. Thus in Daniel (Dan 7:2-7) the lion is introduced as the symbol of the Babylonian power; the bear, as the symbol of the Medo-Persian; the leopard, as the symbol of the Macedonian; and a nondescript animal, fierce, cruel, and mighty, with two horns, as the symbol of the Roman. Dan 7:2-7. In John there is one animal representing the Roman power, as if it were made up of all these: a leopard with the feet of a bear, and the mouth of a lion, with two horns, and with the general description of a fierce monster. There was an obvious propriety in this, in speaking of the Roman power, for it was, in fact, made up of the empires represented by the other symbols in Daniel, and "combined in itself all the elements of the terrible and the oppressive, which had existed in the aggregate in the other great empires that preceded it." At the same time, there was an obvious propriety in the symbol itself; for the bloodthirstiness and cruelty of the leopard would well represent the ferocity and cruelty of the Roman power, especially as John saw it here as the great antagonistic power of the true church, sustaining the Papal claim, and thirsting for blood.

And his feet were as the feet of a bear. Dan 7:5. The idea here seems to be that of strength, as the strength of the bear resides much in its feet and claws. At the same time, there is the idea of a combination of fierce qualities--as if the bloodthirstiness, the cruelty, and the agility of the leopard were united with the strength of the bear.

And his mouth as the mouth of a lion. Dan 7:4. The mouth of the lion is made to seize and hold its prey, and is indicative of the character of the animal as a beast of prey. John has thus brought together the qualities of activity, bloodthirstiness, strength, ferocity, all as symbolical of the power that was intended to be represented. It is hardly necessary to say that this description is one that would apply well, in all respects, to Rome; nor is it necessary to say, that if it be supposed that he meant to refer to Rome, this is such a description as he would have adopted.

And the dragon. Rev 12:3.

Gave him his power. Satan claimed, in the time of the Saviour, all power over the kingdoms of the world, and asserted that he could give them to whomsoever he pleased. Mt 4:8-9. How far the power of Satan in this respect may extend, it may not be possible to determine; but it cannot be doubted that the Roman power seemed to have such an origin, and that in the main it was such as, on that supposition, it would be. In its arrogance and haughtiness--in its thirst for dominion--in its persecutions--it had such characteristics as we may suppose Satan would originate. If, therefore, as the whole connexion leads us to suppose this refers to the Roman secular power, considered as the support of the Papacy, there is the most evident propriety in the representation.

And the seat. θρονον. Hence our word throne. The word properly means a seat; then a high seat; then a throne, as that on which a king sits. Here it refers to this power as exercising dominion on the earth.

And great authority. The authority was great. It extended over a large part of the earth, and alike in its extent and character, it was such as we may suppose Satan would set up in the world.

Revelation of John 13:4

Verse 4. And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast. Rev 12:3; Rev 13:2. That is, they in fact worshipped him. The word worship--τροσκυνεω--is not always, however, used in a religious sense. It means, properly, to kiss; to kiss towards any one; that is, to kiss his own hand and to extend it towards a person, in token of respect and homage.-- Rob. Lex. Compare Job 31:27. Then it means to show respect to one who is our superior; to kings and princes; to parents; and pre-eminently to God. Mt 2:2. The word may be used here to mean that homage or reverence, as to a higher power, was rendered to the "dragon;" not strictly that he was openly worshipped in a religious sense as God. Can any one doubt that this was the case under Papal Rome; that the power which was set up under that entire domination, civil and ecclesiastical, was such as Satan approved, and such as he sought to have established on the earth? And can any one doubt that the homage thus rendered, so contrary to the law of God, and so much in derogation of his claims, was in fact homage rendered to this presiding spirit of evil?

And they worshipped the beast. That is, they did it, as is immediately specified, by saying that he was incomparable and invincible; in other words, that he was superior to all others, and that he was almighty. For the fulfilment of this, 2Thes 2:4.

Who is like unto the beast? That is, he is to be regarded as unequalled and as supreme. This was, in fact, ascribing honours to him which belonged only to God; and this was the manner in which that civil and secular power was regarded in the period here supposed to be referred to. It was the policy of rulers and princes in those times to augment in every way possible the respect in which they were held; to maintain that they were the vicegerents of heaven; to claim for themselves sacredness of character and of person; and to secure from the people a degree of reverence which was in fact idolatrous. Never was this more marked than in the times when the Papacy had the ascendency, for it was its policy to promote reverence for the power that sustained itself, and to secure for itself the idolatrous veneration of the people.

Who is able to make war with him? That is, he is invincible. They thus attributed to him omnipotence--an attribute belonging only to God. This found a fulfilment in the honour shown to the civil authority which sustained the Papacy; for the policy was to impress the public mind with the belief that that power was invincible. In fact, it was so regarded. Nothing was able to resist that absolute despotism; and the authority of princes and rulers that were allied with the Papal rule was of the most absolute kind, and the subjugation of the world was complete. There was no civil, as there was no-religious liberty; and the whole arrangement was so ordered as to subdue the world to an absolute and uncontrollable power.

(b) "who is able" Rev 17:14

Revelation of John 13:12

Verse 12. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him. The same amount of power; the same kind of power. This shows a remarkable relationship between these two beasts; and proves that it was intended to refer to the same power substantially, though manifested in a different form. In the fulfilment of this, we should naturally look for some government whose authority extended far, and which was absolute and arrogant in its character, for this is the power attributed to the first beast. Rev 13:2, seq. This description had a remarkable fulfilment in the Papacy, considered as a spiritual dominion. The relation to the secular power is the same as would be indicated by these two beasts; the dominion was as wide-spread; the authority was as absolute and arrogant. In fact, on these points they have been identical. The one has sustained the other; either one would long since have fallen if it had not been upheld by the other. The Papacy, considered as a spiritual domination, was in fact a new power starting up in the same place as the old Roman dominion, to give life to that as it was tending to decay, and to continue its ascendency over the world. These two things, the secular and the spiritual power, constituting the Papacy in the proper sense of the term, are in fact but the continuance or the prolongation of the old Roman dominion--the fourth kingdom of Daniel--united so as to constitute in reality but one kingdom, and yet so distinct in their origin, and in their manifestations, as to be capable of separate contemplation and description, and thus properly represented by the two "beasts" that were shown in vision to John.

And causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast. That is, to respect, to reverence, to honour. The word worship here refers to civil respect, and not to religious adoration. Rev 13:4. The meaning here, according to the interpretation proposed all along in this chapter, is, that the Papacy, considered in its religious influence, or as a spiritual power--represented by the second beast--secured for the civil or secular power--represented by the first beast--the homage of the world. It was the means of keeping up that dominion, and of giving it its ascendency among the nations of the earth. The truth of this, as an historical fact, is well known. The Roman civil power would have long ago lost all its influence and been unknown, if it had not been for the Papacy; and, in fact, all the influence which it has had since the irruption of the Northern barbarians, and the changes which their invasion produced, can be traced to that new power which arose in the form of the Papacy--represented in Daniel (Dan 7:8) by the "little horn." That new power gave life and energy to the declining influence of Rome, and brought the world again to respect and honour its authority.

Whose deadly wound was healed. Rev 13:3. That is, was healed by the influence of this new power represented by the second beast. A state of things occurred, on the rise of that new power, as if a wound in the head, otherwise fatal, was healed. The striking applicability of this to the decaying Roman power--smitten as with a deadly wound by the blows inflicted by the Northern hordes, and by internal dissensions--will occur to every one. It was as if a healing process had been imparted by some life-giving power, and, as a consequence, the Roman dominion--the prolongation of Daniel's fourth kingdom--has continued to the present time. Other kingdoms passed away--the Assyrian, the Babylonian, the Medo-Persian, the Macedonian; Rome alone, of all the ancient empires, has prolonged its power over men. In all changes elsewhere, an influence has gone forth from the seven-hilled city as wide and as fearful as it was in the brightest days of the republic, the triumvirate, or the empire, and a large part of the world still listens reverently to the mandates which issue from the seat which so long gave law to mankind. The fact that it is so is to be traced solely to the influence of that power represented here by the second beast that appeared in vision to John--the Papacy.

(e) "wound was healed" Rev 13:3