then, is a division in that which is one, which is impossible. Impossible it is on any other supposition, excepting that the one set of representations are reduplications, thus identical and thus one with the other. This is an evidence for a double allegory which it will be difficult to set aside. The prophecy is represented as one and also as divided and twofold, there being one division in it, two things which are inconsistent with each other, absurd and impossible. But there is neither inconsistency nor impossibility on the theory of A DOUBLE ALLEGORY. The double allegory thus solves an inconsistency and impossibility which must be solved. It alone does this, for there is plainly no other supposition that can do it. This is a feature very much in favor of the double allegory.

The prophecy then is delivered, in consonance with the reason just stated, in two allegories, each bearing the same second sense and each making the same revelation, one of which allegories precedes, while the other follows the "silence in heaven about the space of half an hour," which silence divides not the prophecy, it being one, but simply the representations of it, making these representations, and not the prophecy, which is one, twofold.

Let us examine the two allegories thus disposed, as they are before and after "the silence," and endeavor to perceive that identity which there is ground to conceive exists, or rather let us endeavor to discover if there be any difference between them. This will be difficult.

However, before entering on the analysis of the

66

first allegory, we shall first note a peculiar feature it exhibits. This peculiar feature it has, and which distinguishes it from the second allegory, is the introduction of four principal figures in it, by the Four Living creatures who call upon John to come and see these figures. As this is a formulary which is visible nowhere else in the book, the conclusion naturally to be drawn is, that the whole subject of the prophecy is here developed, and that all the other pictures which John is not called upon to "come and see" bear a subordinate relation to these. Else why is the prophet called upon to look upon these pictures, and not the others? After "the silence," there is a second fourfold group, ch. xii.-xiii., which John is not called upon to look at. For what reason? and there must be some reason. We are not only author. ized, but we are called upon by every sound principle of hermeneutics, to suppose there is. It will be difficult to find any other reason, except that the second group is a reduplication of the first. This sufficiently accounts for it that the formula which is used in the one case is in the other omitted. It is particularly to be observed that, while in the interpretation of an allegory no stress ought to be laid on mere phraseology, it is different where objects or actions are described. These, and not the words (the words are only valuable as they indicate these), are the true signs of the allegory. Just as in the interpretation of a writing, we are not at liberty to assume that a word is meaningless, neither is it allowable, or rather it is much less allowable, in the interpretation of an allegory to as

sume that an action is without meaning, since an action, unlike a word, is a cumbrous sign which cannot with justice be held as employed without a purpose. Here is an action, an important action, performed by a highly important symbol. It has a meaning. What is it? It will be very difficult to find any other meaning except that the introduction of the whole subject of the prophecy is here made by the four living creatures. Accordingly, the second quaternal group in chs. vii. and xiii., consisting of the Woman, the Dragon, and the Two Beasts, must be held to be reduplications of this group, since the whole subject of the prophecy is developed by the four living creatures.

The first four seals of the Seven-Sealed Book, as they are opened in order by the Lamb, display to the eyes of the prophet a fourfold group of Four Horsemen. The two remaining seals, the fifth and sixth, describe simply events. There are, accordingly, no more than four figures exhibited before "the silence," that is, in the first allegory, which figures are the Four Horsemen. What is the plot or design developed in it? Every allegory has, as has been shown, necessarily one such.

The first Horseman, the rider upon the White Horse, is described as a conqueror. It follows the other three are the combatants whom he conquers, for otherwise there were no design in the representation at all, which is absurd and impossible. But the victorious Horseman of the group is a conqueror in the highest degree, for it is said of him that he goes

forth "conquering and to conquer," which is a Hebrew idiom for conquering eminently, the phraseology expressing simply the Hebrew superlative form. It is a rational conclusion that this victor, who is described as a victor in the highest degree, not only overcomes, but that he extirpates the three combatants with which he is associated. This is the more to be held, since the first allegory ends with a scene representing not only victory, which, on the ground of unity of design, must be held to be his victory, but perfect and everlasting peace and security, which presupposes the destruction of all his enemies, ch. vii. 9-17.

Such is the fourfold group introduced by the four living creatures, and the interpretation which is at once naturally and rationally to be formed of the exhibition made of them. The first four seals, then, simply contain a representation of four agents or actors, of whom one is a victor, from which circumstance a contest is to be inferred.

The two following seals describe events. A regard to design, which the interpreter is not only authorized but always under obligation to assume in the work he interprets, necessitates the conclusion that these events bear reference to the fourfold group which the prophet has just described. If not, the actors are described without events, which is plainly absurd and an inference not to be drawn. Accordingly, the conclusion is a necessary one, that the events of these two seals are the events in which the actors above-described are concerned.

sense.

The fifth seal exhibits a scene of oppression, but it is an oppression which is to be avenged, and is to end in victory, for of the oppressed, it is said, "White robes (the emblems of victory, for the proper symbolic force of white throughout the book is victory) were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellow-servants also, and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled." Ch. vi. 11. That the church militant is described under this seal, there can be no doubt. But we have nothing to do at present with the second We are restricted to the first representation. Here is a representation of the oppressed, described as "the souls of them that were slain," clothed with white robes, emblems of future victory, and whose cause is to be avenged. Who can these be, but those for whom the Conquering Horseman stands? They cannot be the conquered, for they are destined to ultimate victory. They cannot be other conquerors, for such a supposition conflicts with unity of design in the prophetical piece. They are, accordingly, the final Conqueror; and his oppression for a season, which is stated to be limited, (v. 11,) and which in the second allegory is defined to be 1260 symbolical days, is here represented. Now every victory presupposes a combat, and to every combat there are necessarily two sides. Accordingly, to the full development of the subject, as displayed in the first four seals, there is necessary the representation of the temporary defeat of the final Conqueror. That the