stood secure, and at length from their peaceful shore, and across their island channel, like Israel looking back over the glassy Red Sea near them to where it appeared mingled with fire, on the day of their salvation,-when thus, I say, they saw the enemy that would have ruined them, overwhelmed and destroyed, and, coincidently with this event, beheld the still-continued progress of the manifestation of God's gospel-truth committed to them, -when by foreign emperors and princes, on their visit soon afterwards to this island, (as on Jethro's to the Israelites,1 after the deliverance of the Red Sea,) there was homage done to the holy cause itself, and to the individuals most prominent in promoting it, chiefly for its sake, how did they join, as with "harps of God," in notes of adoration and praise: how recognize God's faithfulness and truth, and greatness and holiness, so different from all the gods of Popery or heathenism : how, with glowing heart and tongue, (and who can forget him to whom we have just been alluding, that has heard him touch the sweet harp of prophecy on the topic? 3) anticipate the time as not very far off, when the promises of the latter day should be accomplished, the everlasting show forth my power in thee, and that my name might be made known in all the earth.' Pharaoh's oppression of Israel prepared the way for their deliverance. He permits his people to be brought low, that his interposition in their behalf may be the more signal and more glorious." 1 Exod. xviii. 1—11. 2 See the account of Deputations to the Emperor Alexander in Owen's B. S. History, and some of the Missionary Reports. Also Wilberforce's Life, iv. pp. 190, 198. 3 "Sweet is the harp of prophecy," &c.: the commencement of a passage in Cowper, that was among Mr. Wilberforce's most cherished and favourite passages. "There is in such a scene," said he in 1819, after a missionary meeting, a moral sublimity which, if duly estimated, would be worthy of the tongues of angels. Indeed I doubt not they do participate." Life, v. 17. On occasion of the opening prospect in 1817 of Christianizing St. Domingo, he writes; "I glow to witness before I die, in this and so many other instances, the streaks of religious and moral light illuminating the horizon; and, though now but the dawning of the day, cheering us with the hope of their meridian glories." iv. 355.— So too in Lord Glenelg's eloquent speech at the Bible Society Anniversary, 1814. "It seems to announce the near approach of the period, when instead of welcoming the inhabitants of a few countries only, we may hail the union of the nations of every quarter of the globe; when even from distant realms the delegates of a thousand sister Societies may hasten to pay homage to the Parent Society, and announce the progressive triumphs of the holy cause." Owen, ii. 578. Gospel fulfil its commission, and all nations come and worship before God and the Lamb!! Fly abroad, thou mighty gospel, Win and conquer; never cease! See its morning breaks apace. But was the Dragon to be ejected from his empire over the heathen world, or the Beast from the throne of Anti-christendom, without a fresh putting forth of Satanic subtlety and power to uphold them? Again, was the gospel's triumph to be achieved, and the morning of the world's jubilee to be brought in, by the mere agency of mission Societies; or without Christ's own more direct intervention, and judgments of his wrath attendant, burning like fire? To these questions we shall in the prophetic, and indeed partially in the historic sequel, soon see the answer. 1 "And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb saying, Great and marvellous are thy acts, Lord God Almighty! Just and true are thy ways, O King of saints! Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name; for thou only art holy. For all nations shall come and worship before thee; for thy righteousness hath been made manifest." APPENDIX TO VOL. III. ON THE EPOCH OF THE FIRST ASSUMPTION OF THE DIADEM BY THE ROMAN EMPERORS. (See pp. 14 and 106.) In my two former Editions the medal of Maximian was given as that of a diademed Emperor. Such seemed clearly, both to myself and to a few friends to whom I shewed it, the character of the band round the Imperial head in the cast of the medal sent me from Paris; in which cast, however, that band may have been considerably rubbed and worn. We could not discern any trace of the leaves of the laurel crown. In this point of view the medal, which was otherwise not a little interesting, became doubly so because of its furnishing to the eye an illustration, not merely of Diocletian's and his colleague's rage against Christianity, but also of their assumption of the diadem as early as the outbreak of their persecution of the Christian body. Up to the eve of the publication of my 2nd Edition, I had not been aware that the correctness of Gibbon's statement, as respects Diocletian's own assumption of the diadem, under his new tetrarchical constitution of the Roman Empire, had been a point disputed. Mr. Lewis however, to whose kindness I have been indebted for other valuable hints on medallic questions, brought it at that time before me; and suggested a doubt at the same time of the authenticity of my Maximian medal. In consequence I wrote to Paris to get the original medal examined and the result of its inspection by two gentlemen, who were so good as to examine it 1 I still have the cast. for me very carefully, has been substantially a confirmation of Mr. Lewis' suspicion. The medal is indeed an authentic one; but they assure me they can distinctly trace upon it the marks of the leaves of the laurel crown. Under these circumstances, and as the evidence of my Maximian medal is thus set aside, it becomes necessary that I should acquaint my readers with the nature of the controversy on the point spoken of, and the existing state of the evidence concerning it, both literary and medallic. It is to be understood then that under the Constantinian dynasty, from Constantine himself downwards through the fourth century, it is admitted on all hands that the diadem was, as Gibbon states, the distinctive, properly speaking,' of the Augusti or supreme Emperors; while the laurel was the more proper badge of the Casars : this latter being theirs indeed not exclusively, but in common with the Augusti. The case of Julian is one excellently illustrative of the then general custom. He was in 355 made Cæsar by his first cousin Constantius, the then reigning Emperor, (son to the great Constantine,) xwpis te diadnμatos, as Chrysostom expresses it,3 i. e. without the diadem distinctive; in which station he continued for five years. Accordingly the medals struck by him during this period, both bear the inscription Cæsar, and are all laurelled: with the exception only of one struck at the precise conclusion of the period, conjoining the Cæsar and the diadem; which however confirms the rule, rather than violates it. For it seems that at the end of the five years, he was tumultuously voted into the dignity of Augustus, by the acclamations of the soldiery; and struck the medal, apparently, while waiting the confirmation of their vote by Constantius. On which occasion of his election the soldiers, having I say, properly speaking; because there are one or two exceptional cases under the Constantinian dynasty, which will be noted by me afterwards. See Note 3 p. 449 infrà. The medals of the Augusti, through the greater part of the fourth century, from Constantine inclusive downwards, appear perpetually laurelled on medals, as well as diademed. 3 Orat. 64 in S. Babyl. On the face there is inscribed, D. N. JULIANUS NOB. CES. round Julian's head diademed; on the reverse, VOT. V. MULT. This shews that the coins were struck at the end of his Cæsarean quinquennium. See Spanheim, Tom. ii. p. 385. > Zonaras reports, says Valesius ad Amm. Marcel. xx. 8, and Julian himself states |