The Roman Empire in the Light of Prophecy Part 3

A Blank in Prophecy.

It should be observed, in pa.s.sing, that Scripture is apparently silent concerning the occupation of Palestine by the Saracens and Turks. Such silence is noticeable when we remember how definitely the occupation by the other Gentile powers, the Chaldean, Medo-Persian, Greek, and Roman, and the order and character of their rule, were predicted. The cause of the silence is not difficult to ascertain. The four Gentile powers just mentioned had to do with the Jews as the recognised possessors of Palestine, either by way of removing them from their country or restoring them to it, or during such time as they were permitted to remain in it with liberty to continue their temple worship and sacrifice. The Chaldeans removed the Jews from the land, the Medo-Persians repatriated them, the Greeks permitted their continuance in it, the Romans did so too, until A.D. 70, when they crushed them.

When, however, the Saracens and the Turks seized the land the Jews had been scattered, nor have they received national recognition while under them. Gentile occupation of Palestine during such times as the Jews remain in their present condition seems therefore to receive no direct notice in prophecy.

The restoration of Palestine to the Jews is closely connected with the revival of the Roman Empire in its tenfold form. Prior to considering the manner of this revival we must notice how during the period between the overthrow of that Empire and its coming resuscitation, its dominions and their government have remained Roman in character, thus affording a further proof that the coming and final world-power will not be entirely a new one, but will be a revival of the ancient Roman or fourth empire indicated in the prophecies of Daniel.

The Continuation of Roman Government and Influence.

Such was the prestige of the Roman name and authority that the chieftains of the Germanic tribes which in the fifth century subdued the western half of the Empire governed the conquered territories, not so much as tribal chiefs, but as successors to, and in continuation of, the imperial rule; they introduced no radical changes in the provincial and munic.i.p.al forms of government of their predecessors. Civil organisation remained distinctly Roman, and has continued so; upon it are based some of the chief munic.i.p.al inst.i.tutions of modern life. Indeed Roman civil law still remains the foundation of modern jurisprudence.

In south-eastern Europe, too, countries which were for centuries under the power of the Turk retained, in their munic.i.p.al inst.i.tutions and organisation, the impress of Roman authority. It should be remembered that though the eastern or Byzantine portion of the ancient Roman Empire was distinct from the western, its emperors being designated as Grecian in contrast to the Roman, yet its legislative foundations were laid in the Roman Empire prior to the division of the east from the west.

Byzantine imperialism was therefore really Roman under an eastern t.i.tle.

According as the states in the east have become freed from the Turkish yoke, so the character of their government and legislation has conformed in a large degree to those of the west. The further diminution of the Turkish Empire will doubtless see a corresponding revival of western conditions and methods.

Roman Imperialism Continued.

It is important also to observe that notwithstanding the pa.s.sing away of the Roman Empire as such, the principle of imperialism remained, and, amidst the vicissitudes of national government in Europe, has continued to the present time. The imperial power in the west was not abolished when in 476 the last Roman Emperor was deposed. On the contrary, there was a kind of reunion imperially of the west with the east. For a considerable time the tribal kings of the west received recognition from the eastern emperors, and were regarded as their a.s.sociates in imperial control. This was the case even with the Saxon kings in Britain, and on Saxon coins may be seen to-day the same t.i.tle, _basileus_ (_i.e._, king), as was borne by the emperors at Constantinople. Italy itself was wrested from the Teutons by the eastern Emperor Justinian in the sixth century, and remained under the Byzantine Caesars till 731.

Meanwhile the Roman Senate continued to exercise its authority, and in 800 chose the Frankish king Charlemagne as their sovereign. He was already ruling over the greater part of Western Europe, and was now crowned as Emperor at Rome by the Pope. Though his empire fell to pieces after his death, his dominions retained, and have since retained, their Roman character.

Consideration of s.p.a.ce forbids our tracing here the further continuance of imperialism as a factor in European politics. Recent history and present-day events indicate how rapidly we are approaching its final development at the close of the times of the Gentiles. The coming confederacy of European states will not result in the formation of a new empire, but will be the revival of the Roman in an altered form.

CHAPTER V.

THE COMING REVIVAL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

(1) _The Geographical Standpoint._

The coming revival of the Roman Empire will for our present purpose be best considered from the geographical, political, and religious standpoints.

Geographical Considerations.

Any forecast of the exact delimitations of the ten kingdoms const.i.tuting the reconstructed Empire must necessarily be largely conjectural. That their aggregate area will precisely conform to that of the ancient Roman Empire does not necessarily follow from the fact of its revival, and cannot be definitely concluded from Scripture. An extension of the territories of the Empire in its resuscitated form would be quite consistent with the retention of its ident.i.ty. Moreover, if Roman imperialism may be considered to have continued in the hands of Teutonic monarchs after the fall of the western part of the Empire in 476, if, for instance, Charles the Great, of whom we have spoken (p. 58), ruled as a Roman Emperor, despite the pa.s.sing away of the actual Empire itself, then the dominions which were under the rule of these later monarchs may yet be found incorporated in the Empire, and so form parts of the ten kingdoms. In that case Germany and Holland would be included.

Possibly, too, the Empire will embrace all the territories which belonged to the three which preceded it, the Grecian, Medo-Persian, and Chaldean. Certainly when the stone fell on the toes of the image, the whole image, representing these former three as well as the fourth, was demolished. Suggestive also in this respect is the fact that the beast in the vision recorded in Revelation 13. 2 was possessed of features of the leopard, the bear, and the lion, the same beasts which represented in Daniel's vision the Grecian, Medo-Persian, and Chaldean kingdoms (Dan. 7. 4-6), the order in Revelation 13 being inverted. While political characteristics are doubtless chiefly in view in these symbols, there may at the same time be an indication of the eventual incorporation of the first three empires in the fourth. It must be remembered, too, that the authority of the federal head of the ten kingdoms is to be world-wide: "There was given to him authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation" (Rev. 13. 7). It is probable, therefore, that while the ten kingdoms will occupy a well defined area, their dependencies and the countries which are allied with them will embrace practically the remainder of the world.

If, on the other hand, the Roman Empire is to be reconstructed in exact conformity territorially with its ancient boundaries--such a reconstruction is, of course, not inconceivable--we must consider what period of the conquests of the ancient Empire to take, whether under the first emperor, Augustus, or during the Apostolic Age, or later. We may, perhaps, be helped by the facts already mentioned, that prophecy relating to Gentile dominion is focussed upon the Jews and Palestine, and has especially in view the presence of the nation in their land.

Now, shortly after their overthrow, in A.D. 70, their national recognition as possessors of the land ceased. This period, moreover, corresponds broadly to the close of the Apostolic Age. The dispersion of the Jews among the nations was completed by Adrian in the next century.

He desolated the whole of Palestine, expelling all the remaining Jewish inhabitants.

A Review of the Ancient Territories.

We will therefore now review the limits of the Empire and of some of its provinces at that time, noticing certain circ.u.mstances of past and present history suggestive of future issues. In doing so we are not predicting that the boundaries of the revived Empire will be those of the ancient.

Commencing with North Africa, it will be observed, on referring to the map, that practically the same strip of territory which belonged to the Roman Empire in the times of the apostles has pa.s.sed directly under the government of countries which were themselves then within the Empire.

For Spain rules over Morocco, France over Algeria and Tunis, Italy recently seized Tripoli, and Britain has, since Turkey's entrance into the great war, virtually taken possession of Egypt. It seems not a little significant that no country which was outside the limits of the Empire at the time under consideration has been permitted by G.o.d to annex these North African territories since the Saracens and the Turks were dispossessed of them.

Pa.s.sing now to Asia, the territory in that continent which belonged to Rome in the first century is approximately what remained to Turkey immediately prior to the present war. Mesopotamia and most of Armenia were included. The war has already seen Turkey dispossessed of portions of these. The downfall of the Turkish Empire would almost certainly involve territorial rearrangements of deepest import in the light of prophecy, especially as regards Palestine.

Divisions of the Greek Empire: A Possible Renewal.

The 8th chapter of Daniel apparently indicates that the Asiatic territories of the Empire will be divided much as they were under the Greeks after the death of Alexander the Great. He was obviously symbolised by the great horn (v. 22). The four horns which came up in its place (v. 8) are clearly, too, the four generals who succeeded Alexander, and among whom his dominions were divided, Ca.s.sander ruling over Macedonia and Greece, Lysimachus over part of Asia Minor and Thrace (the extent of the latter province was almost exactly what now belongs to Turkey in Europe), Seleucus over most of Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, and the east, and Ptolemy over Egypt. Next follows a prediction carrying us to events which are evidently yet future. It is said, for instance, that these events will take place "in the latter time of their kingdom (not, it will be observed, in the time of the four kings themselves who succeeded Alexander, but of the kingdoms over which they ruled), when the transgressors are come to the full" (v. 23). The expressions in this chapter, "the time of the end" (v. 17), "the latter time of the indignation," "the appointed time of the end" (v. 19), and "the latter time of their kingdom" (v. 23), all point to a period still future, namely, to the close of the present age. Again, in reference to the "king of fierce countenance," while much of the prophecy can be applied to Antiochus Epiphanes in the second century B.C., yet no man has. .h.i.therto arisen whose character and acts have been precisely those related in verses 9-12 and 23-25. We may also compare what is said of "the transgression that maketh desolate" (v. 13) with the Lord's prophecy concerning the abomination of desolation (Matt. 24. 15-22), a prophecy which also manifestly awaits fulfilment.

Possibly, therefore, these Asiatic territories will be similarly divided in the coming time. In regard to the first of the above-mentioned four divisions, the recent extension of Greece to include the ancient province of Macedonia is remarkable. This was an outcome of the Balkan War of 1912. The boundaries of Greece are now approximately what they were under Ca.s.sander in the time of the Grecian Empire, what they were also later as the provinces of Macedonia and Achaia in the Roman Empire.

There has lately, therefore, been a significant reversion to ancient conditions in this respect.

Other European Territories.

Coming now to the dual-monarchy of Austria-Hungary, reference to the map of the Roman Empire in the Apostolic Age will show that what are now Hungary, Transylvania, Bessarabia, and other states of the present monarchy were without the Roman boundaries, while Pannonia, or what is now Austria west of the Danube, was within; even when in the next century Dacia (now Transylvania, Bessarabia, &c.) was annexed, the two parts of the present dual kingdom were separate. The separation of Hungary from Austria has for a considerable time been a practical question of European politics, and may be hastened by present events.

The northern and north-eastern boundaries of Italy embraced the Trentino and the peninsula of Istria. Noticeable, therefore, are the present efforts of Italy to acquire these very districts, efforts which seem likely to achieve success. Roman states north of Italy covered what are now Baden, Wurtemberg, Luxemberg, and a large part of Bavaria. The possibility of an eventual severance of these from Prussian domination has been much discussed of late.

The Rhenish provinces of Alsace and Lorraine, originally portions of the Roman province of Gallia (now France), were s.n.a.t.c.hed from France by Germany in the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71. Their recovery is a supreme object of the efforts of the French in the present war, and not without hope of success.

The British Empire.

As to Britain, at the time under consideration the greater part of the island was definitely included in the Roman Empire. Ireland and most of Scotland were never conquered by the Romans. Should Britain form one of the ten kingdoms, there is nothing to show that Ireland or any other part of the British Empire must of necessity be absolutely separated from it. Self-government may yet be possessed by those territories which have not yet received it, and it is significant that Ireland has now practically obtained it. That the lands which are linked with Britain as dependencies, or as in possession of self-government, should remain as integral parts of the Empire is but consistent with the coming world-wide authority of the potentate who will be the federal head of the ten kingdoms. And that each state in the British Empire should have its own local government is, on the other hand, consistent with the establishment of a closer and complete confederacy of ten kingdoms, the area of which may correspond largely to that of the ancient Roman Empire. In contrast to the self-government of the other countries of the world at the coming period, the ten united kingdoms will eventually be absolutely under the control of the final emperor just mentioned, for the ten kings over these states, who receive authority as kings with him, will be of one mind to give their power and authority and their kingdom to him (Rev. 17. 12, 13, 17).

What has been said of the British Empire may be true also of others of the ten kingdoms which have colonies or dependencies, and thus, while the ten kingdoms will themselves const.i.tute an Empire, their alliances and treaties with other countries of the world will apparently involve an extension of the authority of the controlling despot "over every tribe and people and tongue and nation" (Rev. 13. 7). If, for instance, the United States of America were at that time in alliance with Britain (quite a possible contingency), their joint influence would probably extend to the whole of the American continents, which would thereby acknowledge his authority.

We may observe, too, the way in which the continent of Africa has come under certain European influences in modern times. The mention of this is simply suggestive. That the Scripture will be absolutely fulfilled is beyond doubt; the exact mode of its accomplishment is known to G.o.d.

(2) _The Political Standpoint._

European Federation.

Agencies are already at work for the establishment of a confederacy of European States--not the least significant of the many signs that the end of the age is approaching. The movement towards confederacy is doubtless receiving an impetus from the great upheaval in Europe. A circular issued in December, 1914, and distributed far and wide, announced the formation of a committee of influential men with the object of promoting a "European Federation." The circular says: "In sight of the present situation of ruin it ought to be the general opinion that a firmer economical and political tie is of utmost importance for all nations without exception, and that particularly for Europe the narrower bond of a federation, based on equality and interior independence of all partaking states, is of urgent necessity, which public opinion ought to demand."

A pamphlet published by the Committee recommends that the union of states shall be economical, political, and legal, with an international army as a common guarantee, and that European Federation should become the princ.i.p.al and most urgent political battle-cry for the ma.s.ses of all European nations, and declares that "when the Governments are willing, when the public opinion of all peoples forces them to be willing, there is no doubt but that a reasonable and practical union of nations will prove to be as possible and natural as is at present a union of provinces, cantons, territories, whose populations often show more difference of race and character than those of nations now at hostilities." The Committee calls upon the peoples of Europe to suffer the diplomatists no longer to dispose of them like slaves and by militarism to lash them to fury against each other. It calls upon them to see to it that never and nowhere should a member of any body or Government be elected who is not an advocate of the Federation, and that the trade union, society, or club to which any individual belongs should express sympathy with the movement in meetings and in votes. "The people," it is said, "have it now in their power, more than ever before, to control the Powers."

Two Possible Ways of Federation.

The formation of ten federated states, covering at least the area of the ancient Empire at the end of the first century of the present era, may be effected in two ways, either by the peaceful methods of arbitration and treaty, or as a result of strife and confusion. That the present European War will be succeeded by efforts for the creation of permanent international harmony and universal peace is probable, as is also some attempt at such a federation as is proposed by the above-mentioned Committee. On the other hand, sinister indications abound to-day which point to industrial strife and revolution rather than peace. The condition of the industrial world presents a gloomy prospect indeed.

There are ominous signs of keener conflict than ever between capital and labour. The forces of Socialism, Syndicalism, Communism, &c., are rapidly increasing in power and in international activity, and their avowed aims presage anything but peace in the near future. We may take, for example, the declared objects of "The Alliance of the Social Democracy"--now incorporated in the International Working Men's a.s.sociation--"To destroy all States and all Churches with all their inst.i.tutions and laws, religious, political, juridical, financial, magisterial, academical, economical, and social, and to establish in their place industrial co-operation and collective ownership of land and capital." All this sounds very pretentious, and would probably fail of complete accomplishment, but the agencies at work for it are strong.

Attempts on a large scale would certainly lead to unprecedented disorder and chaos.