iiLo vems  
JAMES WHITE LlBR  
AN EXEGETICAL AND HISTORICAL EXAMINATION ANDREWS UNIVER  
OF THE 1260 DAYS OF PROPHECY  
WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION GIVEN TO A.D. 538 AND 1798  
AS INITIAL AND TERMINAL DATES  
A Thesis  
Presented to the Faculty of the  
Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary  
Washington, D. C.  
In Partial Fulfillment  
of the Requirements for the Degree  
Master of Arts  

OF THE BEGINNING AND ENDING  

UN VFR  
berr!en springs, m^h  
HERITAGE ROOiV  
Department of Church History  
by  
C. Mervyn Maxwell  mx\VELL, C. M.  
* * A * '  
August 1951  
H /


TABIE OF CONTENTS  
CHAPTER PAGE  
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . 1  
II. THE NECESSITY OF M ACCURATE INTERPRETATION ........ 5  
A 750-year survey 5  
An adequate Interpretation essential .......... 10  
III. A SUGGESTED INTERPRETATION ................ 12  
The witness of history  ............ 12  
I. 1260 years of what? . . . 12  
II. Ending when? . ................. 20  
The requirements of prophesy 24  
I. Seven prophecies examined . . . 24  
II. Revelation 13:1-10 examined . .  • 29  
III. The time of the Deadly Wound .......... 32  
I¥. The infliction of the Deadly Wound . 40  
Summary and  conclusions ..... 48  
17* IS 1798 AN ADEQUATE TERMINAL DATE? ............ 50  
Why 1798? ....................... 50  
1798 examined ... 5L  
1. A noticeable decline in the ^authority** of  
Catholicism ............. 52  
II. An international missionary movement and a  
disappointment ................ 61


iii  
CHAPTER PAGE 
III. The Deadly Wound epitomized: the papal captivity  
and killing 65  
Summary and conclusions ................. 69  
V. IS 538 AN ADEQUATE INITIAL BATEt ............. 70  
Wiy 538? • 70  
General considerations ................. 72  
The Beast in the sixth century ............. 74  
I. Under the Ostrogoths .............. 74  
II. Under the Imperial Restoration and the Lombards . 78  
III. Conclusion ...... ........ 85  
538 examined ............ 86  
I. The Dragon's donation of its power and of great  
authority .*.............•••• 86  
II. The Dragon's donation of its seat ........ 90  
Summary and conclusion ................. 98  
71. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ' 100  
BIBLIOGRAPHY 104  
APPENDICES ............. .... 117  
I. A BRIEF SURVEY OP THE DEVELOPMENT OP THE EARLY  
SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST POSITION .... .... 118  
II. A REPORT ON QUESTIONNAIRES RETURNED FROM SEVENTH-DAY  
ADVENTIST COLLEGE BIBLE TEACHERS 125  
III. AN INQUIRY INTO THE VALIDITY OF THE  "SLIDING-SCALE"  
DATING, 533-38 TO 1793-98 .... ...... 131


iv  
APPENDICES  PAGE  
IV. EDICTS ESTABLISHING PAPAL AND CATHOLIC AUTHORITY ..... 138  
V. A HISTORY OF THE GOTHIC WAR, 535-553, WITH PERIODIC MAPS . 144  
¥1. A CHRONOLOGICAL CHART SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE  
ASSIGNING OF DATES TO THE 1260 YEARS . . 179


CHAPTER X  
PRODUCTION  
Purpose. The interpretation of prophecy fills an important place  
in the teachings of Seventh-day Adventists, Among the many prophecies  
they interpret  is one which concerns a period variously described in  
the Bible as lasting S^- times, 42 months, or 1260 days. The  accepted  
Adventist interpretation of this prophecy makes of this period a special  
era of 1260 years, and places its beginning and ending dates at A.D. 538 
and 1798 respectively. It was the purpose of this study to inquire into 
the adequacy of these dates.  
Stated in another my, it urns the purpose of this study to find  
out what period in history God had reference to when he spoke of ll1260  
days.«  
The problem. Prom the time of Joachim of Floris at the close of  
the twelfth century down to the present day, many men have assigned  
dates to the 1260 days. These dates differ widely, though they can be  
grouped so as to show trends and schools of opinion. The interpretations  
and conclusions of Seventh-day Adventists in this matter are, in some  
aspects, unique.  
In view of this the question naturally arises, t*ihat dates really  
are the right ones with Ytfhich to bound the 1260 days?" It is this  
question that constitutes "the problem.n


2  
Mature. The nature of this paper is both exegetical and histori- 
cal. it was felt that to examine history for the fulfillment of  
prophetic symbols without first determining what the symbols portray  
would be to put the cart before the horse and to ensure failure.  
The historical section is devoted to an examination of history  
in an attempt to discover the fulfillment on the basis of the exegetical  
study.  
Scope. The scope of this paper is rather broad for a Master1 s  
thesis, including as it does a survey of 1260 years of history and of 
two limited eras* any of which phases could become the basis of a 
separate thesis. But it was fait that in order  to be solved, the  
problem must be grasped as a whole. The period is always presented  in  
the Bible simply and as if it were a unit of time to be taken up and  
considered all at once.  
Importance. The importance of this study is derived from the  
value of Bible study in general and of the study of prophecy in particu- 
lar. The Apostle Peter instructs Christians to know the reasons  
underlying their faith, and says, ttBut sanctify the Lord God in your  
hearts t and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh  
you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.1*1  
Ellen G. White further instructs that prophecy should be presented as  
f,the foundation of the faith of Seventh-day Adventists.ff 2  
J  1 I Peter 3*15.  
2 Ellen G. Ihite, Gospel Workers, p. 148.


If prophecy is the foundation of the beliefs of Seventh-day  
Adventists, and if the Bible teaches that Christians should be able to  
give a reason for their beliefs, then there is importance enough  
attached to an inquiry into the validity of any given prophetic inter-
pretation*  
Authorities cited. In the study of prophetic interpretation,  
•7  
Froour is the chief guide and authority, although the writings of  
perhaps forty men have been examined as source material for their  
opinions.  
Throughout the paper, in making historical allusions recourse  
has been had frequently to the sources such as the Liber Pontificalis,  
Jordanes1 Getica, Proeopius' Gothic War, the Letters of Gassiodorus, 
and so forth. However, since in a  study of this kind an understanding  
of the significance of an event is often of more value than a mere 
recital of the event itself, the opinions of recognized authorities are 
often consulted and quoted,  
A priori considerations. In spite of the wide scope assumed for  
this study, it is still possible to discuss within one paper only the  
most pertinent phases of what might be considered the overall problem.  
Certain points of view therefore must be accepted (or rejected) on an  
a priori basis, Some concepts so treated in this paper include?  
a) As concerning God* That He cannot have led the prophets to  
predict anything that either could not or did not come to pass.  
^ 3 LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers,  
vols, I-IT,


4  
b) As concerning.the prophetic symbols; That in long-term  
prophecies a day stands for a year; that the 42 months7and  
the 3^ times are identical with the 1260 days; and that the  
dragon of Revelation 13 is symbolic of the Roman Empire, and  
the Beast, of the Roman Catholic Church.  
c) As concerning the fulfillments  That even as the prophecy  
paints only a broad outline, so the fulfillment must be  
subject to portrayal in simple terms.  
Organization of the rest of the paper. Chapters II and III of  
this paper deal with interpretation while chapters IV and T present a  
study of historical fulfillment. There is also an appendix containing,  
among other things, a report on orer twenty  questionnaires returned from  
Adventist college Bible teachers in four countries; an inquiry into the  
historical validity of the 533-38 to 1793-98 lfsliding-scale,f dating; a  
summary of a 750-year survey of 135 expositors who have assigned dates  
to the 1260 days; and a history of the Ostrogothic war, with seven  
periodic maps.


CHAPTER II  
THE NECESSITY OF M ACCURATE INTERPRETATION  
If it was the purpose of this paper to examine the adequacy of  
dates applied to the 1260 days of Bible prophecy, it is manifestly of  
the utmost importance to determine first what the prophecy requires for  
its fulfillment* This fact is made increasingly evident when it is  
realized that one of the greatest reasons for the variation in dates  
advocated for this period is the divergence of views among expositors  
as to the meaning of the prophetic symbolism used*  
A 750-YEAR SURVEY  
The writer has made a survey1 of extant exposition of the 1260  
years from the time of Joachim of Floris to the present day, Proom  
was followed as an authority down to the middle of the nineteenth  
century, though the writings of perhaps forty of the commentators  
themselves were also examined. For contemporary views, questionnaire  
replies  were received from twenty others. Altogether about 135  
expositors were consulted either directly or indirectly. For the 
purposes of this paper the results are summarized on a chart in the  
appendix.  
1 See Appendix VI. 
2 LeRoy Edwin Froorn, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers.


Much variation of interpretation. This survey revealed a wide  
range of views on the most appropriate dates for the 1260 years. For  
instance, all sorts of beginning dates and events were3 chosen by the  
various men, including the birth of Christ, the Crucifixion, the  
Ascension, the time  of Paul of Samosata, the entrance of Christianity  
into England, the time of Constantine and of Sylvester, the "decline of  
the power of Rome," the sacking of Rome by Alaric and later by Genseric,  
the fall of Rome, the time of Leo I (to which expositors assign whatever 
date within his pontificate that fits best their scheme), the crowning  
of Justin by a pope in 526, the publication of the Justinian Code in  
529, the imperial letter to the pope in 533, the fall of Rome again in  
538, the fall of the Goths in 552, the "revelation of the man of sin" in  
566, Phocas and the "Universal Bishopric" in 606,  Mohammed's trip to  
Hera in 606, the Hejira in 622, the revolt of the pope against Ravenna 
in 727, and the donation of Pepin in 758  
For ending dates Mid events men chose the rise of Boniface in  
1294, the Diet of Worms in 1521, the Council of Trent in 1558, the time  
of Oliver Cromwell, the death of Louis  XIV in 1714, the beginning of  
the French Revolution in 1789, the "beginning" of important events in  
1792, the  "decree of the National Convention abolishing religion" in  
1793, the  year 1794, the year that "includes the year of the captivity  
of the Pope," 1797, the actual year of his captivity, 1798, and "around  
3  
In this chapter the past tense instead of the customary present  
is used in, citing the views of commentators in view of the historical  
nature of the survey being reviewed.


7  
1800*11 The list of closing events is shorter than that of initial 
events because many expositors looked forward to future dates and so  
could not cite specific events. Such ^future11 dates included 1260,  
1700, 1844, 1847, 1866, 1880, and 2000.4  
Some expositors, while holding that the 1260 days or times  
were to be understood as non-literal periods, nevertheless did not  
consider them to be precisely 1260 years long. For instance, Wyclif  
thought the three-and-a-half times stood for indefinite centuries; a  
Colonial American made them 350 years; Cuninghame shortened the 1260  
years to 1259; and Fleming made them 1242.  
There was also difference of opinion  as to what would transpire  
during the 1260 years. Thomas Uewton said it was a period of temporal  
power among the papists;5 Faber taught that the Mohammedans must be  
fitted into the period along with the Catholics;6 others said it was to  
be the time when the Church had the power to persecute; others, the  
time when the Church had power to domineer over the minds of men; and  
still others, just that it was the f,period of "papal supremacy."  
Unity in diversity. It must be noted, however that in spite of  
all this diversity among so many commentators, more  than half of the  
4 For names and dates of expositors holding these various views  
see the chart in Appendix  
5 Thomas Uewton, Dissertation on the Prophecies, (1796 ed.),  p. 188.  
6  
George Faber, A Dissertation on the Prophecies . . . Relative  
to the Great Period of 1260 Years, pp. 503-405. ~


8  
men studied were divided between ending the period during the French  
Revolution and ending it in the year 1866j and of this half, two-thirds,  
were in favor of the French Revolution as  the terminating era. More- 
over, and this is highly important, though the initial date be 529, or 
533, or 538, or 600, or 606, the.most common event assigned to these  
various dates was the legalization of the pope as supreme in the church.  
There was thus a strong element of unanimity lying beneath the diversity.  
A new trend resulting from the French Revolution. In the chart  
arrows are used  to signify whether a man looked forwards or backwards  
at his time of writing. The length of the arrow indicates how far he 
looked. A study of the arrows reveals that with the French Revolution  
there came a distinct new trend; for, whereas before it the majority of  
writers looked forward and only a few looked back, during and after the  
French Revolution a large number of men looked back and said the period  
had expired.  
According to the chart, before the French Revolution, of thirty- 
three men listed, twenty-six looked to some time more or less distant in  
the future, while only seven said that the 1260 years were past. But 
after the French Revolution began, out of sixty men studied (besides  
Seventh-day Adventists), twenty-five looked forward, while thirty-five  
looked back, and of these, thirty-three looked to the French Revolution.  
Majority in  favor of the French Revolution. It can safely be  
said, therefore, that the majority of expositors who lived through or 
just after the French Revolution, and who assigned dates to the 1260


years felt that the French Revolution marked the close of the period.  
In the Old World, about two-thirds of the expositors studied were in  
this group, while in America the number was a little less than half.  
The catalysmic nature of the French Revolution, and the wild  
destructiveness of its anti-Catholic phases climaxing in 1793-94 and in  
1798, seemed to satisfy many minds that the allotted period of the  
Beast had expired.7 To the attentive student of the historical school  
of prophetic interpretation it must appear as an observation of great 
significance that, after groping  in the dark for six hundred years,  
suddenly a majority of expositors of the 1260 days should set their  
feet on the French Revolution and say, "This is it." When to this 
observation is added the fact that no event since the French Revolution  
has been accepted in such a manner, the student indeed has cause to  
ponder.  
Preconceptions hinder acceptance of the French Revolution. Among  
men who did not accept the French Revolution as the close of the 1260  
years the reason was not necessarily that they did not accept its sig- 
nificance to the papacy, but rather because they felt bound to look to  
some other date in order to satisfy preconceived specifications. Among  
these specifications the most common were a) That the 1260 days must  
7 Many, in view of Daniel 7s26 and of the 1290- and 1335-day  
Pr^e01itlx i°0ked for ^steady decline in the Beast  following the end  
of the 1260 days in the trench Revolution, culminating shortly in its  
final destruction. Only a very few, as will be noted in Chapter III  
looked for a revival of the Beast in fulfillment of the Deadly Wound'  
symbolism. J


10  
end conterminously with the 2300 days, which more often than not were 
calculated to end in 1844, 1847, or 1866; or b) That the 1260 days must  
accommodate the Mohammedans and the Papacy synchronously.  
m ADEQUATE IHTE1PSETATI0I ESSENTIAL  
The trend and the unity noted above are striking indeed, and  
pregnant with significance. Nevertheless, the great diversity of con- 
clusions cannot be overlooked. It might be pointed out, indeed, that  
even among the many who looked to the French Revolution, there was a 
difference as to whether to use 1789, 1792, 1793, 1794, 1797, or 1798.  
One of the main  purposes in the survey was to discover the  
reasons and arguments8 cited by the various men in order to appraise  
their various conclusions and to gather ^at help they had to offer  
towards the present study. This phase of the survey revealed unmis- 
takeably that the divergence in conclusions was a result of a  
corresponding divergence in the understanding of the requirements of  
prophecy, to misinformation as to the course of history, or both.  
It seems safe to say, therefore, that to try to evaluate dates  
suggested in fulfillment of a time prophecy before determining what  the  
prophecy actually specifies is absolutely useless. To study history in  
order to discover beginning and ending dates for a projected 1260 year  
° In view of the condensed nature of Froom1 s volumes, his pres- 
entation of the commentators1 arguments is necessarily curtailed or  
omitted. Therefore this phase of the survey, along with two or three  
other phases of it, cannot be said to be a duplication of his work.


11  
period of papal temporal power, for instance, would be pointless if the  
prophecy could be shown to have no direct reference to temporal power.  
Therefore, in view of the necessity for an adequate exposition  
suggested by the 750-year survey, the next chapter is devoted to an  
exegetical and historic interpretation of all the prophecies dealing  
directly with the 1260 days.


CHAPTER III  
A SUGGESTED INTERPRETATION  
THE WITNESS OF HISTORY  
Fundamental to the whole problem at hand is the question, !*ihat  
does the 1260-day prophecy foretell?11 ^lESO years of what?1* for in- 
stance* Seine say that the prophecy calls for 1260 years of temporal  
power, ishile others say, of persecution, and others, of papal supremacy.  
And when they say, tfpapal supremacy,n what do they mean? Supremacy over  
kings? or over bishops? ot over the East? or over the West? or over the  
saints? or over what?  
Many commentators, in discussing the close of the period, point  
to the loss of temporal power, or to the withdrawal of French support,  
or to the amazing scene of a pope being taken prisoner, as being un- 
questionable indications that the period had expired.  
But what does the Bible say? As a guide for a subsequent analysis  
of the 1260-day prophecies in Daniel and Revelation, let us first examine  
briefly the history of the papacy in order to see what interpretations 
are possible, it being taken a priori that God cannot have foretold in  
prophecy Tsfaat did not come to pass in history.  
I. 1260 YEARS OF HEAT?  
Of Temporal Power?  
The prophecy cannot foretell 1260 years of temporal power, for  
the pope did not come to be a temporal prince until 756 at the time of the


13  
donation of Pepin, and he certainly ceased to have temporal significance  
in 1870, if not sooner,.1  
Of Supremacy Over Kings?  
ffhe prophecy cannot foretell 1260 years of outward supremacy  
over kings and emperors, for no such period exists. Even under Justin-
ian the pope was by no means supreme. ,f During his whole reign Justinian  
claimed the right to appoint and dispossess bishops, to convoke and  
direct councils, to sanction their decisions, and to amend or  abolish  
their canons.1'2 Justinian even went so far as to have the Council of  
Constantinople of 551 erase the name of Pope Yigilius from the ecclesi-
astical dyptichs,3 and later excommunicated him in 553 t4 — results of  
the Pope1 s vacillating opposition to the Emperor in the Three Chapters  
controversy. During this same crisis Yigilius, feeling compelled to 
flee from Justinian, rushed into the Basilica of St. Peter in Constanti- 
nople, only to be seized by the king1 s men as he clung for his life to 
the altar, the soldiers meanwhile grabbing him, some by the beard, and  
some by the hair, till such a scuffle ensued that the pillars of the  
1 The (true) donation of Constantine consisted of church  
properties and estates aplenty,  besides articles of brass and gold and  
silver, but the possession of church lots and income property does not  
constitute a church a "temporal power11 — unless every denomination is 
such. See Liber Pontificalis, Louise Ropes Loomis, trans., pp. 43-72.  
2  - J. B. Bury, et.al., The Cambridge Medieval History, II, 43, 44.  
3 IMd»* P« 48 •  
4 Thomas Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, IT, 595-605.


14  
altar were smashed.5 lot much is suggested in this picture of the  
outward supremacy of popes over kings  
But this is not all. Even at the beginning of the seventh  
century Gregory the Great could not claim absolute supremacy over the  
Prankish Queen Brunhuild, for, though she "treated the church with 
firmness, but with respect,t? and gave gifts to its bishops and built  
abbeys for its monks, yet still she "knew how to control the Prankish 
Church. ... She disposed of the episcopal sees at her pleasure, and 
expelled from his monastery at Luxeuil the abbot Colmabanus who had 
refused to obey her orders.rr6  
•Nor did  the kings follow the Pontiff1 s back and call in  the  
eighth century* When the Lombards besieged Rome in 739, Pope Gregory I II  
could not move King Charles to help him though his messengers besought  
him twice, loaded as they were with gifts, relics, and importunate 
appeal s in the name of St . Peter J  
Lord Acton says that 
The position of the Pope in the Caroiingian empire already  
resembled in many respects that of other Bishops. /The papal 
states gave a degree of immunityJ but the great test of independ- 
ence of factions and families in Rome, whom there was no power to  
restrain, and who were supreme during every vacancy.8  
5 Ibid*> PP* 594, 595.  
6 Bury, op. cit., p. 124.  
7 Ibid«* P- ISO.  

11  
Lord Acton, The Papal States, pp* 23, 24.


15  
Spain has been well described as the most Catholic of all  
European countries, but even Spain was not at first subservient to the  
papacy. Gregory the Great sustained friendly relations with the Spanish  
churches*, and conducted correspondence with them, and in a fatherly  
manner advised King Recared, but, says Bury, 11 at the exercise of author- 
ity over the Spanish Church Gregory made no attempt. He was content to  
recognise the great miracle, as he called it to Recared, of the conver- 
sion of a people, and to leave to their kings and bishops the direction  
of their Church.'1 Indeed, "Spain for a long while remained to a  
considerable extent apart from the general current of life in the  
Western Church.1,9  
Gregory died in 60S. In 612 the Spanish king Sisebut was consid- 
ering himself the ecclesiastical head of the Spanish bishops, and acting  
as such.^  
And if Spain was reluctant to come pnder the Pope1 s dominion in  
the sixth and seventh centuries, she manifested herself but little more  
the subject of the Apostolic See under Philip II in the sixteenth  
century, for in his day a Spanish amy was dispatched against Rome with  
the full approval of the Spanish prelates.^  
Other examples from other countries could be cited. For  
instance, Henry I of England (1100-1135) forbade appeals to the  
9 Bury, op. cit., p. 260.  
10 Ibid»> P* 174.  
11  Lord Acton, Reply (to Gladstone), p. 84.


Apostolic See,12 and the French kings proved themselves obstinate from  
time to time too, as will be discussed a little later.  
Of Ban-European Catholicity?  
<Sh® prophecy cannot foretell a  1260-year period when all of  
Western Europe was to be Soman Catholic. This has been suggested  
already, but more can be said about it. Though the Franks became  
Catholic in 496, and the Burgundians by 518, the Visigoths did not  
become officially Catholic until the Council of Toledo in 589, and even  
then, their Arianism did not die out at once.13 The Lombards did not 
become unitedly Roman Catholic until as late as 698,14 though their 
conversion is usually dated from about a century earlier. England did  
not come under the pope's influence until the seventh century, and it  
separated from it under Henry VIII in 1534 J*5 So there simply is not,  
in the history of Europe, a 1260-year period during which all the  
"seven tribes11 were Roman Catholic, let alone subservient to the papacy.  
Consequently the prophecy cannot have reference to such a fulfillment•  
12 Isaac Barrow, The ope1 s Supremacy, p. 210.  
13 Bury, op. cit., p. 172.  
14 Ibid., p# 206# 
15 See J. A. lylie, History of Protestantism, III, 395-401.


17  
Of Papal Ecclesiastical Supremacy?  
The prophecy cannot foretell a 1260-year period during which  
the Pope was continwmsly to be the "Head of All the Holy Churches."  
This has been suggested in the preceding paragraphs. The Spanish  
churches, for instance, maintained an ecclesiastical independency until  
well into the seventh century, and the English church departed from  
Home in 1534.  
-But what may be a surprise for those who stand for 538 on the  
grounds that on this date the pope became effectively the head of all  
the churches is the historic fact that as a result of the Three Chapters  
controversy between Vigilius and Justinian in the 5401 s and 550*s, there  
1 a  
arose a schism between last and West that lasted for seventy years.  
Indeed, the bishops of Italy and North Africa went so far as to excoin- 1 7  
municate the Roman Pontiff himself Vr1  
Pelagius (Pope from 556 to 561) felt compelled to prevail upon  
larseq and upon Childebart, king of the Franks, to interfere and end by  
force the schism with the other Western bishops, but he pleaded in vain.  
He was unpopular even in Italy. Only two bishops could be found to  
ordain him, and he was soon driven to issue an encyclical ftin order to 
remove suspicion" of heresy; but it resulted in toleration only in his  IP  
own diocese. Thus there is no period of 1260 years when all  
16 Loomis, in Liber Pontificalis, p. 157, footnote.  
17 Hodgkin, op. cit., p. 591.  
18 Loomis, op. cit., p. 161, note citing Jaffe, Hegesta.


the churches of Western Europe regarded the pope as their rightful 
head.  
Of Papal Persecution?  
2he prophecy cannot suggest a 1260-year period of papal  
persecution,19 as if the period began abruptly with active, pope-led  
persecution in, say, 538, and ended just as abruptly in, say, 1798  —  
or would have ended then but for the shortening of the days as indicated  
by Jesus in Matthew 24$22, 29 and Mark 13t24. Persecution is part of 
the picture, but it is difficult to hold it to a 1260-year period, or 
even to a shortened one, for there was persecution as early as the  
fourth century. For instance, Theodosius issued an edict in favor of  
Catholic orthodoxy and against Arians as early as 383, as a result of  
which severe laws were passed against the heretics,20 Pope Siricius  
(384-399) exiled Manichaeans from the city of Rome, and so did other  
popes in the fifth and early sixth centuries, including Homisdas and 
Symmachus in the time of the  Arian Theodoric, Hormisdas "shattering  
them with a multitude of blows" as he sent them into exile.21  
It laiay be objected that the Manichaeans were not, properly  
speaking, saints, and it was the saints, the elect, which were to be  
given into the hands of the Little Horn for 1260 days. The objection  
19 That is, persecution inaugurated and conducted by popes. 
20 See E* B. Elliott, Horae Apocalypt1cae, III, 56,  
21 
Liber Fontiflcalis, pp. 83-86, 110, 111, 119, 120, 130.


19  
Is sustained ~ only to show further that the term ^papal persecution'1  
must be used with care. Even so, it still remains to be proved that,  
even during the time of Justinian, the papacy as such (i.e., the pope) 
conducted any persecution even against the saints. Persecutions there  
were under Justinian in the name of orthodoxy, but the pope can hardly  
be credited with being the author of them. This much is known, that  
when a pope did try to get the armies of Narses to force the western  
22  
bishops into line, the aid of the secular sword was denied. The  
great papal persecutions did not actually begin until the time of  
Innocent III, and they ceased during the eighteenth century, though the  
Spanish Inquisition was not done away with until the nineteenth. To  
try to designate fl1260 years of papal persecution,M and to delimit it  
with specific events, is impossible, and especially so in view of the  
fact that Jesus Himself said there would be no such 1260-year period, 
for it was to be shortened for the electsf sake.23  
22 vid supra.  
2ia>  
Lynn Wood, Professor of Archaeology at the Seventh-day  
Adventist Theological Seminary, has shown that in Hebrew idiom, an  
event occurring during only a part of a fixed period may be spoken of  
as occupying the entire (fixed) period. Thus Samson1s wife is said to 
have wept before him "the seven days, while their feast lasted11 though  
she cannot have begun to do so until the fourth day, and must have  
ceased doing so before the seventh day closed. (Judges 14$7, 14, 17, 18)  
The feast occupied a fixed period of seven days. She wept during a part  
of the feast. So she is spoken of as weeping for nthe seven days.11 (See  
also Numbers 14*33 and Judges 3til, -where an activity occurring during  
the closing part of a period is said to occupy the whole period.) In 
view of this idiom, there is thus at least a possibility that Daniel may  
be suggesting the persecution and scattering of God1 s people as lasting  
for the 1260 years, even though it occupies but a part of it; in which 
case, persecution may be considered only as one of the characteristics 
of the fixed period.


20  
II* EHDISG 1HBI?  
In direct connection with this discussion of the nature of the  
1260 years is the question "What events sometimes said to mark the end 
of the period cannot, in reality, in and of themselves, be shown to do  
so?11  
At the Withdrawal of French Support?  
One of these is the withdrawal of French support from the papacy  
during the French Revolution. Many look at this in wonder, stressing 
the fact that France had been designated the ,feldest daughter of the  
Church.n France was, indeed, a great supporter of the papacy during  
the centuries of its ascendancy, but it must be understood that there  
were many occasions other than the French Revolution when the French 
withdrew their support from the pope. The most notable  was, of course,  
the Babylonish captivity, already alluded to, when the French actually 
exiled Boniface and removed the Popes to France. The remarks24 that  
Philip IV shared with Boniface in 1301 and 1302 do not suggest that at  
that time France was supporting the Roman papacy.  
It was also shown above that during the time of Gregory, Queen  
Brunhuild of the Franks treated the Church with respect but nevertheless  
24 Such as, f,f Know, insolent priest, that we are subject to no  
one in our temporal affairs, and that your fatuity must humble itself  
before us#* ?1 To his nobles and magistrates in court Philip IV declared,  
"that he disowned his eldest son as the heir of his crown, and all his  
descendants, if they ever submitted to the Roman pontiffs." Louis Marie  
De Cormenin, Th^ Public and Private History of the Popes of Rome, trans,  
from the French, II, 34. " ~


21  
with control. Other examples of French insubordination may be cited.  
For instance, in 858 the French bishops said to Pope Nicholas I,  
You may know that we are not, as you boast and brag, your clerksj  
whom, if pride would suffer, you ought to acknowledge for your  
brethren and fellow-bishops. 5  
In fact, around 850, Lothair, king of the Franks, styled himself  
Imperor of the West, and during his time Pope Leo IV "steadfastly fought  
to keep the papacy free of Prankish intrigues and schemes.11 °  
On two other occasions during the ninth century the French  
manifested hostility to the apostolic father in a most tangible manner,  
as will be noted in a moment.  
Gladst one c omment s t  
It is well known that, in the days of its glory and intellectual  
power, the great Gallican Church had not only not admitted, but had  
denied Papal infallibility, and had declared that the local laws  
and usages of the Church could not be set aside by the will of the  
Pontiff. lay, further, it was believed that in the main these had 
been, down to the close of the last Century, the prevailing opinions  
"of the Cisalpine Churches in communion %clth Rome.^  
He continues, stMimarizing the early history of the Gallican  
church,  
An Anglo-Roman writer has told us that in the year 1612 (query  
1614?) the assembly of the Gallican Church declared that the power  
of the Popes related to spiritual matters and eternal life, not to  
civil concerns and temporal possessions. In the year 1591, at  
Mantes and Chartres, the prelates of France in their assembly refused  
the order of the Pope to quit the king, and on the 21st of September  
repudiated his Bulls, as being null in substance and in form. It  
25 Barrow, op. cit., p. 129.  
26  John Farrow, Pageant of the Popes, p. 75,  
^ W. E. Gladstone, The Vatican Decrees in their Bearing on Civil  
Allegiance, pp. 29, 30.


22  
has always been understood that the French Church played a great  
part in the Council of Constances . . . the Council of Paris in 1393  
withdrew its obedience altogether from Benedict XIII., without trans- 
ferring it to his rival at Rome; restored it upon conditions in 1403; 
again withdrew it, because the conditions had not been fulfilled, in  
14061 and so remained until the Council of Constance and the elec-
tion of Martin ¥.28  
It will be shown later that the withdrawal of the French support  
of the papacy during the French Revolution did have a bearing on the  
close of the 1260 years; but to say that this, in and of itself, was an  
indication that the 1260 years were at an end, is manifestly unsound,  
for it had happened many times before — though no  one says that these  
other occurrences indicated the end of the period.  
At the Captivity of a Pope?  
.The captivity of the pope in 1798 likewise is not, in and of it- 
self, an indication of the close of the 1260 years, for the pope has  
been incarcerated or exiled many times>  
For instance, shortly after his election in 855, Pope Benedict III  
was humiliated and, at the point of the sword, forced into prison by a  
rival, Anastasius, backed up by the Frankish deputies of Louis II* For- 
tunately for the Pope it was all patched up within two days, and there  
followed a triumphal reinstallation, while during the following year  
Benedict had the pleasure of receiving King Sthelwolf when he appeared  
with a crown of gold and the dedication of England^ tithe.29  
28 Ibid., p. 46.  
29 Louis M. De Comenin, The Public and Private History of the  
Popes of Rome, trans, from the French, I, 23&,233. Also Farrow~op. cit., 
pp. 75,76.


23  
But within a decade that is, in 863, it happened again. The  
Pope condemned Lothair II for wanting a divorce, and forthwith the  
Prankish soldiery "beseiged Rome and for two days kept the pontiff a  
prisoner, without food, in St. Peters," ~ this time, be it noted, with  
the support of the archbishops of Cologne and Treves i30  
lor were these the only occasions of incarceration for His  
Holiness. Lord Acton refers to difficulties during the twelfth century,  
and says that "before the dispute was concluded, the Popes had been  
exiled more than once, imprisoned, and deprived of nearly all their  
domains; but in the act of Otho IV, of the year 1201, repeated in 1209,  
the independence of the Roman States is definitely settled and acknowl-
edged.31  
And was not Vigilius exiled by Justinian in 553,32 and was not  
Hildebrand forced to flee Rome,33 and Boniface VIII put in bonds?34  
in addition, that is, to the Spanish imprisonment of the pope for seven  
30 Farrow, op. cit., pp. 77, 78.  
31 Lord Acton,  The Papal States, p. 25.  
32 Hodgkin, op. cit., pp. 595-605.  
33 To Salerno, by Henry IV, in 1084. Cormenin, op. cit., I, 377.  
34 
Done in preference to killing him. The French ambassador to  
Rome said in the Pope* s presence, "lo, we will not put to death this  
infamous priest... . . it will be the most terrible of chastisements for  
this proud man to spare his days, that he may pass them in opprobrium 
and humiliation." Turning to the Pope, dressed as he was in his most  
official and symbolic regalia, he said, "Then prepare thyselfs dog. . . .  
The Pope was kept in custody three days, until a popular uprising obliged  
the French to leave. Boniface died shortly afterward in Rome in a 
paroxysm of madness, gnawing his arms. Cormenin, op. cit., II, 36, 37.


24  
months in 1527, referred to above? In fact, after presenting a long  
list of popes with their exiles or similar hardships, he sums up by 
saying,  
I might add many more, but it is enough to sum them up: thirty  
were compelled to leave Rome; four were imprisoned, four were unable  
to set foot in Rome; seven reigned in exile in  Avignon; making in  
all forty-five, or one-fifth in the line of the Sovereign Pontiffs.35  
Manifestly the 1798 captivity of the Pope, in and of itself,  
cannot be said to indicate the end of the 1260 years.  
THE IEQUIHEKBNTS OF PROPHECY  
If the 1260-day prophecy cannot be fulfilled in any of these  
ways, how then was it fulfilled? And what, then, does the Bible  
prophecy specify?  
I. SEVEN PROPHECIES EXAMINED  
The 1260-day period is mentioned in the Bible eight times, twice  
in Daniel and six times in  Revelation.  
In Daniel the 1260 days are designated as "three and a half  
times." In Daniel 7:24-26 the statement is:  
And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall  
arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse  
from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.  
And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall  
wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and  
SS Henry Edward Manning, The Temporal Power of the Yicar of  
Jesus Christ, p. 188. . ~ ——- —


25  
lawsj and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times  
and the dividing of time.  
And the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his domin- 
ion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.  
Significant pointers can be gained from these verses as to the  
nature of the 1260 years, and a little about its dating, including:  
1) The "Little Horn11 is not to arise until after the Soman Empire  
is divided.  
2) The Little Horn is to be different from the other kingdoms,  
and Is to persecute, blaspheme, and change laws.  
3) "They" are to be given into his hands for times. Apparently  
"they" are great words against God, the saints, and the laws.  
There are some things which this passage does not teach. For  
instance, it does not say that the Little Horn is to have the mastery 
over the ten horns (or even seven of them) for the entire 3f times.  
This is not even suggested. Secondly, neither this  passage nor its  
context gives the plucking up of the three horns as necessary before the  
times can begin. It is true that verse 8 says that "before him three  
of the first horns were plucked up," but this "before" is translated  
from the Aramaic qodam, which means place, and not time.QQ As a matter  
36 According to Young1 s Concordance, the Aramaic word qodam is  
used 31 times in the Old Testament: three times in Ezra, and twenty- 
seven times in Daniel. Thirty of these times it is translated "before,"  
and once, "in the presence of," Daniel 2s27. In every case but two  
there is no question but that the word means "in the presence of."  
Examples of such usage include Ezra 7:19 and Daniel 6:10, 26; 7:10, 13, 
where the translation is "before God." ( Obviously this cannot mean  
"before God was in existence," and so must mean "in His presence." In  
Ezra 4:18 it is "before the people." In most other references it de- 
scribes activities taking place "before" the king, and again there is  
no'question but that the usage is in reference to location and not time.


26  
of fact, apart from the expression "after them,11 that is, after the ten  
kings, there is no indication in Daniel 7 as to the timing of the 3-J*  
times or 1260 days*  
The next reference is in Daniel 12t5-9:  
Then I Daniel looked, and, behold, there stood other two, the  
one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other on that 
side of the bank of the river*  
And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the  
waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these 
wonders?  
And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters  
of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto  
The two cases Yfhere there might be any question are in Daniel 7*  
Daniel 7*7 says, nAnd it /the fourth beast/ was diverse from all the  
beasts that were before it*ft Here time might be indicated instead of  
location, but verse 12, which says the lives of the beasts were prolonged, 
and Revelation 13, which shows them all living in composite form even 
after the fall of Rome, indicate that the first three beasts stayed1Hiin  
the presence ofn one another as they appeared in turn*  
The other verse where there might be a question is, of course,  
verse 8, the one under discussion: "Before whom there were three of the  
first horns plucked up by the roots*® In this case the usage of qodam  
in 29 other instances should be conclusive, but there is further evidence* 
In this verse and in the parallel passage, verse 20, which contains the  
phrase flbefore whom three fell,n the word qodam is coupled with the word  
min to form the phrase min qodam, meaning, literally, Mfrom the East*n  
This Aramaic idiom cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be said to  
convey the sense of time* Other instance of the use of this idiom occur  
in Daniel 5:19 and 6:26 where reference is made to the people fearing  
''before11 God* Since, as above, this cannot be construed to mean l!before 
Sod existed,11 it must mesxt, tlin His presence*11  
It must be concluded, therefore, that the reference to the three  
hornsf being plucked up before the little horn gives no indication as to  
the timing of the 1260 days, and that any discussion based on the sup- 
position that it does, is without value*


27  
heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for  
a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to  
scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be  
finished.  
And 1 heard, but I understood not* then said I, 0 my Lord, what  
shall be the end of these things?  
And he said, Goi thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and  
sealed till the time of the end.  
A comparison between this passage and Revelation 10 reveals a  
striking similarity. In one case the angel is seen standing upon the  
waters, (or from above the, the margin says; which suggests, astride the  
river, a foot on either bank), while in the other he is standing with  
one foot in water and the other on land. Both angels speak of time, one  
using the expression "time of the end,11 and the other, "time shall be 
no longer.!1 Both lift up their hands and "sware by Him that liveth  
forever and ever." In Daniel the angel says that the words (of t he book  
of Daniel) are sealed^ In Revelation  the angel holds a little book  
open, and bids the prophet eat. The fact that Daniel's angel swears  
that "it shall be" for 3^ times, and the other swears that "time shall  
be no longer," apparently indicates that the latter angel is standing  
at the end of the 3*gr times. Piecing together the evidence from these 
two references, additional observations about the 1260 years can be  
noted  
.4) It is a period during which the holy people will be scattered.  
5) The bitterness resulting from the eating of the little book  
(manifestly the prophecies of Daniel which were described as  
closed by the first angel) would be subsequent to a new under- 
standing of Daniel that would come at the end of the 3|r times.  
6) Ignorance of the closing part of Daniel would be widespread  
at the beginning of the 3^ times, but.


28  
7) .The understanding of it would spread over sea tnd land in a  
great world-wide movement at the end of the times.  
8) The 1260 days do not extend to the end of the world, for after  
they are over the book must still be eaten, a disappointment  
or bitterness follow, and still there be time to prophesy  
again before many peoples. (Revelation 10:11)*  
In Revelation 11:2 the period is referred to as "forty and two  
months11 during which the holy city is "trodden under foot.11 In verse  
4 it is referred to as % thousand two hundred and threescore days11  
during which the Two Witnesses "prophesy11 "clothed in sackcloth.11 The  
same picture .is resumed in Revelation 12:6 where the Woman, after flee-
ing, is spoken of as having a "place prepared of God, that they should  
feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days,11 and again in  
verse 14 of the same chapter, where it says,  
And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she  
might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nour- 
ished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the  
serpent,  
during which time "the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood 
after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the 
flood." (Verse 15.)  
These verses add but little to the overall concept of the  
character and chronology of the period as given by Daniel in conjunction  
with Revelation 10. Under various symbols, God*s people are again  
pictured as being in travail during the time of the antichristian power.  
One point is added, however, —  
9) >The symbol "Two  fatnesses11 indicates that this is to be a time  
not only of suppression of .the saints, but also of truth, of  
God* s Word., —


29  
The texts studied have revealed much in a general way about the  
nature of the 1260 days, and, as to chronology, have shown that it  
would begin after the establishment of the ten kingdoms, and end at a  
time when general persecution had ceased, when an understanding of  
prophecy was spreading over land and sea, and before a disappointment  
would be occasioned by the awakening. Beyond this, however, nothing  
specific as to time is presented.  
II. REU1MTI0H 13:1-10 EXAMINED  
Revelation 13 is the most complete and specific reference in its  
treatment of the 1260 days. In it, a Beast is depicted fthaving seven  
heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads 
the name of blasphemy.11 This beast is "like unto a leopard, and his  
feet . . . as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion.M  
Then follows a most striking statement in regard to its history:  
And the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great  
authority. And I saw as it were one of his heads wounded to death; 
and his deadly wound was healed; and all the world wondered after  
the beast. And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto 
the beasts and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto  
the beast? who is able to make war with him? ("Verses 2-4.)  
So much for verses 1—4. Yerses 5—10 continue the narrative:  
And there was given unto hk a mouth speaking great things and  
blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two  
months.  
And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme  
his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.  
And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to  
overcome' thems and power was given him over all kindreds, and  
tongues, and nations.


30  
And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names  
are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the  
foundation of the world.  
If any man have an ear, let him hear.  
He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that  
killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the  
patience and the faith of the saints.  
Before entering into a discussion of verses 1-4, and of the  
relationship of the various parts of the chapter to one another, let 
some new points be observed about the antichristian power as presented  
in verses 1-10, namely, —  
10).All the world shall wonder after the beast, but  
11) There is nothing that says this universal wonderment would  
be universal at any given moment, nor that it would be  
continuous for the 42 months. All that the verses say  will  
happen throughout the 1260 days is that the beast would have  
'"authority to continue.1137  
12) At the end of the 42 months the beast was to undergo captivity  
and a killing by the sword, and this prospect was to encourage 
the saints whenever they were persecuted during the 42 months..  
The Introductory Mature of Revelation 13:1-4  
In understanding the chronology of the 1260 days it is fundamen- 
tal to establish the relationship between the first four verses of  
Revelation 13 and the remainder of the chapter.  
A careful reading of the chapter seems to reveal that these first  
four verses present an introduction to the remaining material, so that  
37 
The Greek word translated "power11 in the Authorized Version is  
^exousla,n which may be better translated "authority."


31  
verses 5-10 quoted above are an enlargement on the history of the  
Beast between the reception of power, seat, and authority, and the  
infliction of the Deadly Wound, while verses 11 to the end are an  
enlargement of verses 3 and 4, the period after the Deadly Wound was  
healed.38  
Some of the reasons which lead to this conclusion may be summed  
up as follows *  
a) The argument is rational. It is not absurd to  suggest such a  
repetitious, enlarging parallel.  
b) The practice of repeating prophetic narratives out of their  
chronological order, or of leaping ahead to the end and then 
coming back, is a fundamental characteristic of Daniel and  
the Revelation.39  
c) This is the way the verses are paragraphed in the Revised  
Standard Version.  
d) Verse 4 cannot describe the Roman Catholic church during the  
1260 years, for it pictures all the world as asking, "Who can  
make war with him?11 During the 1260 years of antichristian  
38  
It may be contended that verse 11 introduces a new power not  
foretold in verses 1-4, and this is correct; but its function is closely  
related to what has gone before. It is shown influencing "them that  
dwell on the earth11 "to worship the first beast whose deadly wound was  
healed," that is, the beast "which had the wound by a sword and did live."  
39 
Daniel 7 and 8 are repetitions and enlargements upon Daniel 2,  
each approaching the subject from new angles, and gradually progressing.  
In Revelation, the Seals and Trumpets bear a comparable relationship to  
the Churches. Revelation 13:5-10 and 13t15-17 likewise find counterparts  
in Revelation 12:5, 6, 13-15 and 12:17 respectively. Anachronistic  
arrangement is seen within chapters, too, such as Daniel 7, where verses  
18 and 21 are introduced out of order in order to encourage Daniel about  
the ultimate victory of the saints; and in Revelation 12, where the  
story of the Tfoman stops with verse 6 only to start again with verse 7,  
the first account being dated from the birth of Christ, and the second  
from the fall of Satan in heaven.


32  
ascendancy, many people made tar -with the pope and also with  
his religion, including France, Spain, and England, in  
y literal battle, and Germany, Holland, Switzerland, and  
England in spiritual conflict.  
If the Lamb-Like Beast of verses 11 to the end is portrayed as  
leading the world into a new and deeper subjection to the Beast, as  
indeed it is, and then this latter passage is paralleled with verse 4, 
in which the world lies in prostrate amazement before the beast^ the  
reasonable nature of the argument in favor of verses 1-4 as an Intro- 
duction is manifest.  
This, therefore, leads to the thirteenth observation:  
13), The Deadly Wound of verse 3 must be at least partly the same  
as the leading into captivity and the killing by a sword of  
verse 10, and hence it must come at the close of the period*.  
But the mention of the Deadly Wound as coming at the close of the  
period suggests so large and so basic a question, that a special study  
must be devoted to it.  
III. THE TUBE OF THE DEADLY'WOUBD  
Recognized by Some as Occurring in the Eighteenth Century  
It is highly significant that, until the rise of Sabbatarian  
Adventists, no expositor studied placed the Deadly Wound at the end of  
the 1260 years.  
Some, however, though they made no allusion to the 1260 days, did  
suggest that the•Deadly Wound occurred around the close of the eighteenth  
century, and even in 1798. In this group there was, for instance,


33  
Timothy Dwight,40 who, in 1781, said that the restraining of the power  
of the Jesuits in his day was a deadly wound to the papacy. Eight  
years later, as the French Revolution broke out in 1789, the German  
41  
Christian Thube said that the Deadly Wound was occurring before his  
eyes, and that it would be healed. Unfortunately, he too omitted  
reference to the 1260 days, and he marred his testimony by citing a  
previous deadly wound that was healed.  
In the year 1800 George Richards42 in his Bampton Lecture became  
apparently the first to say that the Deadly Wound had been inflicted  
by the swords of the French, but again he too does not tie in the event  
with the 1260 days. In 1813 Samuel Toovey43 likewise has the Deadly  
Wound inflicted by France, to be healed in time, but omits the 1260 days.  
As Froom observes,44 Adam Clarke45 around 1820 noted in his  
comments on Daniel 7:25 that in 1798 the papacy received a deadly wound  
which in his time was but lightly skinned over, but in this he is at 
variance with himself for in his comments on Revelation 13 he has the  
40 
L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, III, 245.  
41 Ibid«> II* 777, 778. 
42 Ibid., III, 327, 328.  
43 Ibid«> 359, 7I4-V 
44 Ibid., 355.  
45 Adam Clarke, Commentary, IV, 595; VI, 1017-1020.  
THE LIBRARY  
S.D.A. Theological Seminary


34  
Wound healed by Charlemagne and  the captivity of verse 10 as still  
future.46  
The Standard Position  
The reference to Clarke1 s teaching that Charlemagne healed the  
Deadly Wound brings the discussion back towards the standard position.  
The standard position among almost all commentators of the his- 
torical school who discussed the first beast of Revelation 13 is that 
its seven heads were forms  of governments of Rome. There  were some  
variations in just what forms of governments were intended, but a rep- 
resentative list would include kings, consuls, dictators, decemvirs,  
military tribunals, consuls, and emperors. The main differences cen- 
tered around the sixth and seventh heads, but the lists were substantial- 
ly the same.  
With this interpretation as the accepted standard, the wounding  
was usually understood as being inflicted upon the imperial head by the  
barbarians. The American John Cotton47 in 1639, Robert Fleming48 in  
° It would be a pleasure in this part of  the thesis to cite the  
opinions of better-known men that the ones referred to (though some of  
these were by no means unknown men). Unfortunately, however, the  
majority of modem commentators are either preteristic or futuristic in  
their interpretations, and hence so far removed from the a priori con- 
siderations of this paper as to be of no assistance. Others are of no  
help for various reasons. Calvin, for instance, though he wrote many 
volumes of comments on the Scriptures, wrote nothing on Revelation.  
47 Froom, op. cit., p. 37. 
48 Robert Fleming, Apocalyptic Key, p. 27.


35  
1701* .feorg* Bell49 in 1795, and William Ciminghame5(> in 1807, are  
examples of those who said that it was inflicted by the Heruli and Goths  
when they conquered Italy; and healed when Justinian restored the im- 
perial government in Rome or Ravenna, Bishop Newton51 in 1754 had the  
Wound inflicted when the Goths moved the capital from Rome to Ravenna, 
making Rome a mere dukedoms and its healing in 727 when the pope revolt- 
ed against the exarch. James Blcheno52 in the 17901 s followed Newton,  
though setting the date for the Wound at 568-774, and insisting, in  
contrast to Hewton, that the papacy must be said to have begun its tern  
before the Wound and not after it, as lewton taught.  
Other men, such as Simpson52 and King54 though so clear on 1798  
as the end of the period, seem to have had nothing to offer on the  
Deadly Wound.  
55  
William Miller varied a little from the others, in that he  
said that the head that was wounded was paganism, with the Deadly Wound  
occurring in 508. He thus distinguished between the Wound and the  
49 George Bell, "The Downfal of Antichrist," Evangelical Magazine,  
XV f "  
50 William Cuninghame, Dissertation on the Apocalypse, p. 213.  
51 Thomas lewton, Dissertation on the Prophecies, (1796 ed,)#  
pp. 548-550. —  
52 James Bicheno, Signs of the Times. 
53 David Simpson, A Plea for Religion.  
54 Edward King, Remarks on the Signs of the Times.  
55William Miller, Remarks on Revelation Thirteenth, pp. 7-10»


36  
captivity and killing, which latter event he said, occurred in 1798*  
Other Millerites seem to have agreed with him.  
It was only natural that the Millerites should have placed the  
Wound that was to be healed at the beginning of the period, for they  
understood that the world was to end in 1843, and hence there could not 
possibly be" time for it to be healed if it should be placed at the end.  
The Seventh-day Adventist Position  
And so, as was mentioned above, it was left for the Seventh-day  
Adventists, or rather, Sabbatarian Adventists as they were known then,  
to discover that the Deadly Wound is identical with the sword-stroke of 
verse 10, and occurs at the end of the 1260 days.®®  
In May 1851 J. If. Andrews, realizing that time was continuing on  
after 1844, seems to have been the first to have set the Deadly Wound  
«at the close of this period11 of 1260 years; noting further that the  
fact that the Two-Horned Beast is to  cause  the world to worship the  
Beast whose Deadly Wound was healed "shows that its period of action is  
56 Motet The placing of the Deadly Wound in 1798 involves a  
complete break with the standard position, for it makes the wounded head  
to be the papacy before it is wounded, while all the commentators save  
Bicheno have it to be the imperial head that is wounded, the Beast being 
a symbol of the Roman empire. But the Seventh-day Adventist position  
can be maintained. First, the Beast cannot be Rome, for the Dragon  
represents Rome, and if the prophet cannot be allowed to mean two dif-
ferent symbols in the same context, how else can he convey his ideas?  
Secondly, the Dragon gives his authority to the Beast. It is strange to  
suggest that John is going to all this trouble to say that Rome gives its  
power to Rome. Further, as Cuninghame ^observes, the location of the  
crowns on the horns of the Beast (instead of on the heads, as with the  
Dragon) indicates a new era of time as being brought under scrutiny with  
the introduction of Revelation 13.


37  
this side of 1798.n In the same article he continues on to show that  
Cfj  
the lamb-like beast is the United States. Apparently the light on the  
Deadly Wound and on the United States in prophecy came to him at the  
same time •  
Joseph Bates, in August, 1851, wrote an article presenting the  
same views on the Deadly Wound at the end of the 1260 days, in 1798,  
and saying that it began to be healed in 1815.58 Hiram Edson, in 1856, 
differed slightly by placing the Wound somewhere between 1798 and  
1809.59  
Ellen £. TBhite also favored the placing of the Deadly Wound at  
60  
the close of the period. In view of the fact that this view is a  
matter of prophetic interpretation, something in the realm of spirituals,  
and not merely an allusion to history, her position should be of immense  
interest to Seventh-day Adventists.  
The placing of the Deadly Wound at the end of the 1260 years is  
established further by a comparison of verses 12 and 14 of Revelation 
13, where the Beast is first identified as the one ffwhose deadly wound  
was healed,11 and again, as the one ,fwhich had the wound by a sword, and  
57 J. I. Andrews in The Review and Herald, Volume I, IIj May 19,  
1851, p. 82, column. 2.  
58 Ibid*» August 5, 1851, pp. 3, 4.  
59 Ibid»* January 24, 1856, p. 130. 
60 In Great Controversy, edtion of 1911, p. 439, she sayss  
This period, as stated in preceding chapters, began with the su- 
premacy of the papacy, A.D. 538, and terminated in 1798. At that  
time, the pope was made captive by the French army, the papal power  
received its deadly wound, and the prediction was fulfilled, f?He  
that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity.11


38:  
did live/1 thus revealing the identity between the Wound, and the  
killing by the sword.  
Objections. ,It is contended by some that the wound by the sword  
is to be  "understood spiritually, the sword being the Word of God, and  
gl  
the wounding being, perhaps, the Reformation. But this view is not  
wholly sound. In Revelation the sword that procedes out of Christ1s  
mouth is uniformly hromphia in the Greek, the great Thracian broad  
sword; while the sword of Revelation 13 is machairay ;a smaller and  
different instrument. It therefore appears that John does not have the  
spiritual sword in mind.,  y  
It may also be objected that the Beast has never really died, the  
events of 1798 notwithstanding; Catholicism has never died out in Europe.  
This objection may be answered by & reading of the Revised Standard  
Version.of Revelation 13:2 which has "seemed to have a mortal  wound,11  
and by a study of the original Greek text which may be taken as • showing  
that while the wound was intended to cause death, it. was not in actuality  
fatal. The Greek passage involved  may be translated:  
A Those who contend that the wounding by the sword must be  
spiritual, and hence inflicted by the Word of God, must show that it is 
fulfilled in the Reformation and not during the French Revolution.  
£ body, blow was indeed struck at both the papacy and Catholicism by  
the word! of God in the sixteenth century, but the "illumination11 and  
"awakening" that led to the weakening of the papacy at the end of the  
eighteenth century was caused by skepticism, atheism, and gross  
indifference, and not by the Word of God. Missionary societies did  
begin to'spring up in the\^790, s, but these did not come into their  
strength until the early decades of the nineteenth century, after the  
French Revolution; "and their success then may be considered more a  
result of the upheavals of the French Revolution than a cause of them.


39  
And one of its heads having its throat cut as if in order to  
cause death, and its blow of death was treated/62  
Conclusions  
Specific bounding events noted. With Revelation 13$1-4 taken as  
an introduction to or preview of the remainder of the chapter, a great  
V >  
The Greek for Revelation 13:3 is K«u feK ru»v Ktf?^wv/  
oturoo els ©<*v*Tov} k*» 9 TrXjjyij roO Qus/tirou  
ot6ro0 iGepoLTTeOBf).  
Significant words are icr^ny^V^v, £ist -tr^pyj^ and  
irev&j. '  £<fe*yj</>/yv is the acc. sing. fern. perf. pass. part, of  
tf^TTu^or cr<p<i/Ju>, 'e^epflitrrJ©^ is the third pers. sing. pass, aorist of  
. Liddell and Scott (A Greek Lexicon, II, 2039) define £>s  
"with Participles in the case of the Subject, to mark the reason of the  
action, as if, as." They define afifa  (ibid., pp. 1737, 1738): of  
human victimes, to kill* of cattle, to "slay, slaughter, properly by  
cutting the throat.11 They define 5 (ibid., I, 492) as being used~  
sometimes to show "purpose or object." They define -tt>?y? (ibid., II,  
1417): "blow, stroke. . . , metaph., blow, stroke of oalamTEyT esp.  
in war." They define ©«peur(ibid., I, 792, 793)~s "do service to  
. . . take care of . . . treat medically," ~ and thus as referring to  
treatment and not "healing." This distinction is bourne out by Moulton 
and Milligan also. (James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The 
Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, p. 289.) The meaning is probably 
equivalent to "to heal" in this case, however, since, if the use of the  
passive suggests the same "Divine Remission" suggested in the use of  
the passivei8o©9 in w. 5, 7, it may be assumed that if God permits  
the treatment, the devil will accomplish the cure. Compare also w.  
12, 14.  
The passage, therefore, may be translated thus: "And one of  
its heads having its throat cut as if in order to cause death, and its  
blow of death was treated."  
It is evident that the wound did not cause the death it was  
intended to, for a resurrection is not referred to, but only a healing.  
Compare Lazarus, who was sick, died, and was resurrected, (John 11),  
with Hezekiah, who though "sick unto death," did not die, but was  
miraculously healed§ (Isaiah 38)• "


40  
deal is added to the understanding of the chronology of the 1260 days,  
for now specific events for the beginning and ending are supplied.  
Revelation  13 teaches,  
14)* That the period is  to begin when the dragon gives its power,  
its seat, and great authority to the beast; and,  
15) It is to end when the Deadly Wound is inflicted.,  
A further observation. A further observation remains to be made,  
namely, that on the basis of the above study of Revelation 13:1-4, It  
can be safely said that the events marking the beginning and  ending of  
the period are different. There  are not a few expositors of the present  
day who hold that there must be discovered parallel events for beginning  
and ending; that at the end of the period there would occur the reverse  
of what happened at the beginning. But It can be said confidently, on  
the basis of this passage, that there is no foundation for the parallel- 
ing vogue. Revelation 13:1-4 says the period* s end would be marked by  
a Deadly Wound, later identified with a carrying into captivity* These  
events are not parallel*  
Revelation 13 is the only chapter in the Bible that gives  
specific events for the beginning and ending of the period* Hence,  
16) The beginning and ending events are not parallel.  
IV. THE INFLICTION OF THE DEADLY WOUND  
An Important Distinction  
It is of the utmost importance in understanding the 1260 days to  
distinguish between "papacy11 and "Catholicism.n It is true that the


41  
word '"papacy" can, by extension, be understood to include the whole  
Soman Catholic system, but this very fact has caused much confusion in  
determining the beginning and ending of the 1260 years.  
The Bible makes a distinction. In II Thessalonions 2:3, 4, it  
speaks of "the man of sin," and describes him as the one who  
opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or  
that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God,  
shewing himself that he is God.  
This undoubtedly is the papacy, the line of men, of popes, who  
exalt themselves to be gods.  
But verse 7 speaks also of a system of wickedness, "the mystery  
of iniquity."  
Which of these concepts — man, or mystery ~ is intended by the  
Beast of Revelation 13? The answer must be, both "man of sin" and  
"mystery of iniquity."  
In Daniel 7:17 and 23 the four beasts of that vision are explained  
to be first, "king" and later, "kingdom." The Dragon of Revelation 12  
and 13 is taken to be, not merely the Roman Emperors, but rather Rome,  
directed by Emperors*  
But the Dragon of Revelation 16 cannot mean merely Rome, nor yet  
can it mean merely pagan Rome, for it is seen at the end of time when  
pagan Rome had been dead for centuries. It seems, therefore, that it  
must represent paganism.  
How, also in Revelation 16, the Dragon is spoken of as being one  
third of the great city Babylon, of which the Beast and the False  
Prophet are the other two thirds. If, then, it is right to. identify


42  
the False Prophet with Apostate Protestantism, even as the Dragon is  
identified with paganism, it seems out of place to say that the Beast  
represents "Papal Home." lather, it must represent Roman Catholicism.  
If the Beast is a phase of Babylon, and if it is correct to say  
that "Babylon" represents a confusion of false doctrines, then it seems 
that it must follow, again, that the Beast must be viewed, partly at  
least, as a system of false teachings.  
But neither yet is it satisfactory to interpret the Beast merely  
as a "system" or "ism." Revelation 17sll says that a Beast is a king, 
as also does Daniel 7*17, while Daniel 7*23 interprets it as a kingdom.  
It seems necessary, therefore, to perceive in the Beast of  
Revelation 13 a dual connotation of organization and of doctrine, of  
"man of sin" and of "mystery of iniquity."  
lot only a man. The Book of Revelation is devoted to port raying  
the conflict between God1 s  people and their enemies, between truth and  
error. Into this picture the Beast intrudes often as the enemy of God's  
people and of all that is true. It seems incredible that God would be  
warning his people against merely a line of wicked men, even blaspheme . : ,  
ers, even persecuters. Jesus himself said not to fear those who can 
destroy the body, but to fear only what can destroy the soul. The  
world is full of evil men, evil men in power and authority. It must,  
therefore, be the system, the mystery of evil doctrines, the phase of  
Babylon that these leaders represent that so corrupts the souls of men,  
that God is warning against.


43  
Not only a mystery. But beast also means king, a word that <  
suggests leadership Tested in a government headed by a man or a line of  
men, Daniel speaks of a Little Horn, which by comparison with the other  
horns, suggests that it too, is not merely a teaching, but is an organi- 
zation, a government. It is very definitely "diverse11 from the others  
^yerse 24) but it is still a horn.  
Therefore it may be said, the Beast of Revelation 13 must include  
the concepts both of papacy and of Catholicism,  
The Distinction Validated  
It may be necessary to show whether or not this distinction is  
valid. Is there a difference between the papacy and Catholicism? Can 
a man be a Catholic without fully accepting the pope?  
History shows the answer to be "yes,11 A classic example is the  
case of the Gallican Church which was so often at variance with the  
papacy, holding that popes were not above kings or councils, that only  
in conjunction with bishops were they infallible, and that both church  
and state had ecclesiastical rights "independent and exclusive of the  
jurisdiction of the pope,"®3 no one would say the Gallican church  
was not Catholic.  
Eeeared, Spanish king of the Visigoths in the time of Gregory I,  
maintained an ecclesiastical independence of Rome that Gregory was  
a %  "Gailicanlsm," Encyclopedia Britannica, (1941 ed.) IX, p, 984,


^content11 to allow, but his orthodoxy satisfied the Pontiff.64 It was  
under him, in fact, that the Visigoths became Catholic I  
Henry VIII broke  with the Papacy and made himself the head of  
the Church of England, after his counselors advised him that wThe  
Pontiff of Rome, sire, has no authority at all in England,11®® but no  
one says that Henry VIII was a Protestant.  
Lord Acton says,  
The Irish did not shrink from resisting the arms of Henry II.,  
though two Popes had given him dominion over them. They fought 
against William 111., although the Pope had given him efficient  
support in his expedition. Even James II., when he could not get  
a mitre for petre, reminded Innocent that people could be very good  
Catholics and yet do without Rome. Philip II. was excommunicated  
and deprived, but he despatched his army against Rome with the full  
concurrence of the Spanish divines.  (Emphasis supplied.)  
Individual testimonies may be quoted. Cormenin, for instance,  
who wrote a history of the popes, is an example of a Roman Catholic  
who casts aspersion on the ^adorers of the Roman purpose, and of  
pontifical infallibility," and says, fiWe, who deduct rigorous conse% •  
quences from the truth of history, we will say, that an institution 
like that of the papacy, is a  monstrosity in religion. ...  
At the Vatican council, 1870, a strong minority was strongly  
opposed to the papal determination to "railroad" the dogma of  
64  °P« cit., p. 260.  
65  
Wylie, History of Protestantism, III, p. 400.  
66 Lord Acton, Reply (to Gladstone), pp. 83, 94.  
Cormenin, op. ext., II, 163.


45  
Infallibility* Feeling ran high. But though the delegates-were anti- 
papal, they-were still Catholic. Mien it came time for the vote, only 
two negative votes were cast. After all, their difference of opinion  
was not based on moral or ethical grounds, but only on expediency.  
Bollinger and others carried the matter further and established an "Old  
Catholic11 church of their own. But it was still so essentially 
CCatholic11 that it did not satisfy either good Protestants  of good  
Catholics, and did not last long*68  
It seems to be established  that a distinction between "papacy11  
and "Catholicism11 is defensible. ^People can be very good Catholics 
and yet do without Some.11  
The Distinction Applied  
of this concept* Those who speak of the 1250 years of  
,fthe papacy11 are frequently embarrassed to show how it started and  
stopped at two specific dates just 1260 years apart* Say they, a  
widespread belief in a system of false, doctrines cannot begin  and end  
like that*. The beginning and ending must be gradual. And yet they  
want to be specific, because the Bib!<e is* And the Bible is specific.  
To this era of the Beast it assigns 1260 years, no more, and no less*  
If it is contrary to human nature, and also to the course of  
history, for an ideology to begin and end abruptly, then it is incredible  
68 See J* B* Bury, History of the Papacy in the Nineteenth  
Century, (1864-1878), and Albert Henry Newman, A Manual of Church  
History, II, 494 ff*


46  
to say that God prophesied that Roman Catholicism would begin and end  
abruptly. It cannot be that He did, *andf in fact, it can be shown that  
He did not. The mystery of iniquity was at^ work in Paul1 s day — it  
was just hindered, Paul explains, by "him who letteth,,f who would  
continue to "let" until he be "taken out of the way."69 Mid it was to 
continue on after the period expired, for the wound only "seemed" to be  
unto death,70 and the Deadly Wound was healed.  
But Catholicism is spoken of, in a special way, as operating for  
1260 years. In view of all the Bible passages involved, of human nature,  
and of the history of the church, it seems that it must follow that the  
prophecy indicates that Catholicism would make a special increase in  
its influence over men as the period began, and suffer a noticeable  
decrease in its influence as the period ended.  
If the suggested dual nature of the Beast is accepted, and if  
the paragraphs above are satisfactory, then there is  no need to discard  
an early  initial date for the 1260 years on the basis of a later set- 
back for the papacy, (ji.eu.the popes). The popes were repeatedly  
embarrassed, while, in contrast, the dark tentacles of Catholic errors 
continued steadily to fasten themselves with  increasing dominance on  
the minds of Western Europeans throughout the centuries that followed  
the fall of Rome.  
69 II Thess. 2:7.  
70 Revelation 13:3, RSV.


47  
On the other hand, while the rise and fall of Catholicism was  
gradual, the period is mentioned as .being specific — 1260 years. If  
it is accepted that the  specific dating applies to the man of  sin, the  
papacy, the other "phase" of the Beast, then the problem Is largely  
solved, for it is quite conceivable that a particular organization  
epitomizing and representing Catholicism could begin and end on certain  
datesj or that a certain era in its history could be designated'by well  
marked events*  
thesis* It is therefore the basic thesis of this paper  
that the 1260 years is marked  
a) In a general sense, by an increase and a (later) decrease  
in the influence of Catholicism;  
b) in a specific way by the giving of power, seat, and great  
authority to the pope as the visible head of the system at the beginning,  
and by the inflicting of a captivity and apparent killing of the papacy  
at the end; and  
c) that the "Deadly Wound" symbol, applied to the Beast in its  
ideological phase, signifies a decrease in the effectiveness and 
"authority" of Catholicism, while when  it is applied to the Beast in its  
"papal" phase, it has reference to the captivity and killing of  
Revelation 13s10.  
An observation* This concept of the dual nature of the Beast  
helps to explain why one captivity of the pope may be singled out of  
many and be said to mark the close of the 1260 days  in distinction


48  
to all the others. * Many captivities-of the pope there were, but it is  
only the one that synchronizes with-the decline of Catholicism that  
fulfills the prophecy.71  
SUMMARY MD CONCLUSIONS  
On the a priori basis that God cannot have prophesied anything  
that did not come to pass, this study has shown that the 1260-day proph-
ecy cannot be said t© foretell 1260 years of papal supremacy over kings  
or even all the Catholic churches; nor yet can it mean 1260 years of  
continuous papal persecution! nor yet can it mean 1260 years of Catholic- 
ism in all of Europe — for the reason that no such 1260-year periods 
exist in history. Similarly it has been shown that, taken individually,  
the withdrawal of French support from the papacy in the 179Gfs, or the  
imprisonment of the pope in 1798, cannot be said to mark the  end of the  
period, since the French have often differed with the papacy, and the 
popes have many times been deprived of their liberties.  
When the Bible is turned to for a positive approach, it has  
been shown that no discord with history appears. The Bible contains  
71 It may be mentioned in this connection that Leggitt has  
shown that, * although many expositors term May 19, 1780, the nDark Day11  
of prophecy, there occurred in New England between 1750 and 1798 not 
one but twenty unusually daric periods. However, he has gone on to  
show that the selection of this one date from among so many is amply  
warranted on the grounds that it was the only one which adequately  
fulfilled the apparent requirements of prophecy, and that it was the  
only one that seemed to have significance among the people of the time  
as being a last-day sign. (Deryl Leggitt, An Investigation of the Dark  
Day of May 19, 1780; Its Causes, Extent, and Duration, j


49  
nowhere a reference to the pope1s headship over the entire Western  
Church for 1260 years, for instance, nothing about a papal sovereignty  
over kings for such a period, and so forth.  
^ It has been shown, however, that the period, according to the  
Bible, apparently begins with the reception by the Beast of power,  
seat, and authority, and ends with the infliction of a captivity and 
seeming death. At the end of the period, also, a movement is to be  
seen spreading over sea and land characterized by  a new understanding  
of the book of Daniel, this movement ultimately to suffer a "bitterness11  
to be followed by a revival and continuance of the  prophetic preaching.  
The period itself is to be characterized by  blasphemy, false  
doctrine, subjection of truth, the changing of God1s laws, the scatter- 
ing of God1 s people, and marked persecution.  
Special attention has been given to the study of the Deadly  
Wound. It has been shown that what must, apparently, be looked for  
in fulfilIment of its infliction on the Beast is, in reference to its  
doctrines (Catholicism), a marked decline in their authority to bind  
men* s minds, and, in a much more marked and definite sense* in reference  
to the Beast*s visible head (the papacy), a literal captivity and ap- 
parent killing.  
Since the decline of an ideology and the rise of a missionary  
movement are gradual processes, while, in contrast, the captivity of a  
visible leader naturally occurs on a specific date, it has been shown  
that that captivity of the pope which is intended to end the papacy and  
which coincides with the trends and movements above mentioned, is to be  
taken as the one marking the specific date for the end of the 1260 years.


CHAPTER IV  
IS 1798 M ADEQUATE TERMINAL DATE?  
HEX 1798?  
An interpretation of prophecy having been suggested, it remains  
now to see how  it was fulfilled. But why is 1798 selected for evaluation?  
Simply because it is the only closing date suggested by commentators at  
which the head of the visible Catholic Church was carried into captivity.  
The pope was not incarcerated in 1260, 1672, 1701,  1789, 1793, or on any  
of the other dates suggested prior to 1798• And neither was he so  
treated in 1813, 1842, 1847, 1866, 1880, or on any of the other dates sug- 
gested after 1798e1 But he was carried into captivity in 1798•  
But are there not other dates upon which he was made captive?  
Yes* Before 1798 there were numerous occasions, as has been noted. Of  
course, all those occasions prior to 1355 may be dismissed  without further  
consideration including that of Boniface VIII in 1303, for  it is manifest  
that 1260 years must elapse after John's time before the period can be  
said to have expired.  -The seven-month confinement of the Pontiff under  
Spanish arms in the sixteenth century is an instance worthy of more con- 
sideration, since it was accompanied by an international movement in  
favor of Bible study, the Reformation. However, counting back 1260 years  
from it brings one to the third century, a date prior to the barbarian  
invasions and hence too early, since the Little Horn was not seen until  
after the ten horns were within the confines of the Western Empire*  
1 For the proponents of these  various dates see Appendix.


51  
After 1798 there were also several embarrassing situations of this  
sort for the Pope. In  1809 he was carried away to Savona when the States  
of the Church were incorporated into the French Empire. He returned in  
lSlij. but was forced to flee for 100 days in l8l£, when Murat invaded the  
Papal States. In I87O Rome was taken by the Piedmontese am^2 and he 
voluntarily shut himself up in the Vatican  until the concordat with  
Mussolini in 1929•  
*l8lk may be dismissed as not being essentially a captivity, though  
it was an exile* l8?0 is worthy of consideration, but, as will be shown, 
it came after the disappointment occasioned by the spread of prophetic  
stuiy rather than before it as Revelation 10 requires, and: hence is too  
late., 1809 is also a date worthy of consideration, but it seems strange  
to select it when it is but an echo of what happened eleven years prior,  
in 1798# Moreover, its companion date,  5U9, does not seem too likely,  
as it was a year of deep humiliation for the papacy during the Three 
Chapters controversy.  
It having been shown that other dates are inadequate, it now re- 
mains to be shown whether or not 1798 be adequate*  
1798 EXAMINED  
Three indications of the close of the period were noted as having  
been mentioned by prophecy. These are not taken up and studied in the  
light of history around 1798•  
2 See John Alzog, History of the Church, HI, 683, 101*2-10


r:J  
52  
I. A NOTICEABLE DECLINE IN THE "AUTHORITY" OF CATHOLICISM  
The Revised Standard Version (191+6) of Revelation 13 says that  
"authority was given" to the Beast "over every tribe and people and tongue  
and nationj" also, that "it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-
two months."  
Since various manners in which its authority could be exercised  
during the forty-two months are listed, it does not follow that the Beast  
was to have authority over all nations for the full forty-two months j but  
it mmst follow that the authority could not last more than the forty-two  
months. A comparison of verse 10 with verse 3 indicates, however, that  
even at the close of the period of the authority would not be completely 
curtailed, for the wound, though "deadly* was curable, and hence cannot  
be said actually to have caused death. Therefore the question is, "Was  
there a noticeable recession of the Beast's authority on or before 1798?"  
The answer is, "Tes." Not that the authority abruptly ceased then,  
for it did not — and, as has been determined, the prophecy does not re- 
quire it to have. Indeed, in France, according to Aulard, 1*0,000 of the  
Catholic churches that had closed down in 1793 and 1791^ a few years prior  
to 1798, were already in use again even by Septebmer 1797, and he con- 
cludes "Thus, two years after the Separation, Catholicism was generally  
restored in France."3 But if it can be shown that the people of France  
were less indifferent to Catholicism in 1797 than they had been in 1793,  
3 Aulard, Christianity and the French Revolutions p. llfl.


53  
it does not follow that the Beast had received back its ancient authority*  
Indeed, the contrary was the case. Even in these UOjOQO churches, Aulard  
says, the services were not as well frequented as they had been before.^  
The French Revolution. 1798, though not the most important year  
in the French Revolution, nevertheless may be said to fall within it,^  
and the French Revolutionary era was marked by a definite loosening of the  
hold of Catholicism and the papacy on mankind, as many students of the  
period have observed. Indeed, it was the climax of a deep-seated trend 
towards increasing skepticism and irreligion.  
Pressense observes:  
Nothing is so sad as the religious history of the eighteenth  
century. Piety languishes. ... In England and in Germany a  
parching wind blows over hearts and minds. There is preached  
in the Protestant pulpits—in those which are standing—a re- 
ligion without grandeur, without mysteries, which has neither the  
boldness of philosophy nor that of faith. . . . In the bosom of  
the Ghmreh of France the decay is  visible to all eyes. . .  
Aulard, on the other hand, at first glance seems to take an oppo- 
site view. Noting that the desire to abolish the church and its doctrines  
Aulard, loc. cit.  
g  * Bates for the French Revolution as favored by a few authorities  
are as follows: Gershoy, 1789-1799,a Thiers, 1789-1800,k Pressense,  
1789-1802,e Aulard, 1789-1801*, d Encyclopedia Britannica, 1789-1801*.*  
a Leo Gershoy, The French Revolution, 1789-1799, title.  
b Louis Adolphe Thiers, The History of the French Revolution,  
1789-1800, title.  
c E. De Pressense, The Church and the French Revolution, title p. 
d A. Aulard, The French Revolution, title p.  
6 Paul Wiriath, "France: History," Encyclopedia Britannica, II,  
6U.  
0 E. De Pressense, The Church and the French  Revolution, p. 1$.


54  
•v  was not uppermost in the delegate's minds in 1739, he emphasizes that the  
Revolution set out with the support of the Catholic clergy*7 a fact much  
appreciated by the revolutionaries for some time.® In 1790* although new  
altars to the Fatherland were erected* the people still attended Mass in  
the morning  before celebrating at these shrines in the afternoon.^ Net  
until 1791* when the Pope expressed his adverse opinion of the Civil 
Constitution was the Nuncio  recalled* the Pope burned in effigy* the seal  
set on the schism and the breach between France and the Pope ncomplete11.10  
Even then* it was not until 1793* after the la Vendee uprisings* that  
Sunday was laid aside and Christianity dethroned*1-'- — and as early as  
January 1* 1795* the restoration of Catholicism was under way.1^  
It seems as though Aulard senses but a slight and temporary break  
with the Beast* hardly worth noticing in a 1260-year scope* but this is  
not the  case. Though he has the break with Rome coming late and healei,  
early* he points out that skepticism began much earlier than 1791* and  
emphasizes how little hold any kind of Christianity had had upon the  
masses for centuries. He asks* "Did the Catholic religion* so splendidly  
7 Ibid.* p.  
8 Ibid.* p*  
9 Ibid. * pp. 6LH36.  
10 Ifeid** P« 72. The use of the word tfcomplete" is Aulard1 a  and  
not rnne. It is well known that many peasants and tM large boc^y of noin- 
juring priests never severed their allegiance to Rome.  
11 Ibid«, pp. 97-122.  
12 Ibid*, p. 138.


55  
represented by the Galilean Church* 3&ell strongly in the soul ©f the  
French people on  the eve of the Revolution?11 and answers by showing that,  
even in the middle of the eighteenth century* "to be  impious was to be  
in fashion*0 "This incredulity was not the work of the philosophers —  
it was this incredulity which incited the philosophers to write thus  
against religion."13  
Says Aulard: 
I am struck by the fewness and slightness of the pe asant risings  
caused by the attacks upon Christianity — and in these rising  
I note distinctly a mixture of politics with religion*  
Not a single member of the Convention (except Gregoire) dared  
openly to defend the religion which only the day before had been  
the religion of the'nation*!** '  
It is manifest then* according to Aulard* that Catholicism had  
lain but lightly on the nation for some time prior to 1793 • And it con-
tinued to do so* even though the people longed t© hear the chur ch bells  
ring again. Attendance at the churches in 1797* says Aulard* was not as  
numerous as it had been before*  
Belloc goes further than Aulard in showing the decline of Catholi- 
cism in France prior to 1789* He calls upon his readers to seize the 
"moribund condition o£ the religious life of France upon the eve of the  
Revolution*" He refers to the "swoon of the Faith in the eighteenth  
century*n and  says that "France* in the generation before the Revolution*  
was passing through a phase in which the Catholic  Faith was at a lower  
13 Ibid.* pp* 31-3U.  
^ Ibid** pp* 120-122.


56  
ebb that it had ever been sinee the preaching and establishment of it in  
Gaul.* Again, he refers to "the temporary eclipse of religion in France  
before the Revolution broke out*11^  
Georges Goyau in the §atholie Smcyclopeiia says: t!To repeat a  
saying of Ferdinand Brunetiere, the eighteenth century was the least  
Christian and the least French century in the history of France.^7 *  
Alaog says the same thing. • Infidelity and atheism, he writes,  
pre rife both before and after the Revolution, while "Religious imdiffer'  
en©e prevailed.  
. If the multiplicity of competent witnesses is of any significance,  
there can be no doubt that there was an observable decline in Jlugmpean  
Catholicity prior to 1798 ^  
15 Hilaire Bellec, The French  Revolution, p. 231*  
Georges Gbytu, "France," Catholic iSncytl^peiiaL, VI, 172*  
17 a. H. Newman, whose college text has received wile acceptance,  
may be noted in passing. . After a reference to the infidelity of ^Voltaire,  
and his attack on the Church. a;s l!ltXhfar?ie,fl and to the Dei'sm of Rousseau,  
DfAlanibert, and Diderot, and their projected  social reforms, he sayp, that  
skepticism had^ opened the eye of the frehdi people' to' see that Christianity  
in the form they knew it was the arch enemy of human rights. And, he aids  
significantly, excoiaraunicatidn aiid the interdict had lost their power to  
intimidate and coerce • (Albert Henry Neman, A Manual of Church History,  
pp. k93-h9k.)  
John Alzog,  History of the Church, iii, 1015 ff • Since Alzog  
is a noted Catholic authority, and since to him  "religion11 largely  means  
"Catholicism^" his statement is veiy, interesting and much to the point.  
19  
Mathiea scoffs at those historians who marvel that the Revolution  
did, not break with Rome at its' outset, and ei#laasize:<%ke- ®#reagth  
of ^Catholic-Ism in F^anefcT at the time.4 (Albert Mathiea, La  Revolution et  
L^Sglise, pp. vii-xiii, 1-3.) Nevertheless, the mere fact that the Revo- 
lution occurred when it did, /and ran the course that it did, is evidence  
enough that any strength the Church had at that time was relatively less  
than it had had before; hence this view cannot be said to confute the  
patent decline of Catholicism in Europe at the close of the eighteenth  
century.


57  
Now for a few historical examplest It was not in France alone  
that Catholicism relaxed its grasp during this era* As Newman observes,  
the revolutionary ideas of the French skeptics profoundly influenced  
English, Americans, Swedes, and Frederick the Great of Prussia.20* 21  
In Austria, Joseph II, emperor from 1?80 on, but co-regent with  
his mother from 1765, took great interest in the progress of skepticism*  
He and his minister, Kaunitz, shared the goal of making the German Church  
as independent of Rome as possible. He closed many monasteries and intro- 
duced Bibles and hymnbooks in the vernacular* "Pope Pirns ¥1, whom the 
changed times did not permit to summon heretical sovereigns to the  
threshold of the Apostolic church,11 was compelled to go to Vienna him- 
oo  
self, says Hagenbach, but could not change Joseph's mind. The emperor 
himself was not too successful in his reforms, but Newman points out the  
fact that "that hie opposition to the papacy met with little popular dis-
approval indicated the widespread skepticism and indifferent!sm of the  
And Alzog, sulking, comments: Religious feeling, ^which had  
long since grown cold in Germany," had become "well-nigh extinct toward  
the close of the eighteenth century.  
OQ Newman, op* cit*, pp. k93-k9k*  
Underscoring in these pages is not for emphasis but to aid the  
eye in determining the nations involved.  
99 See K. R* Hagenbach, History of the Church in the Eighteenth  
and Nineteenth Centuries, II, U2k £f *  
Newman, og* cit*, p* l|ij.2«  
^ Alzog, 0£* cit*, p* 679•


58  
Spain underwent a period of non-Catholic enlightenment just pre- 
ceding 1798, though it was temporary and not too marked* Don Manuel de  
Godoy was prime minister of this country from 1792 to 1798, and insti- 
tuted various reforms*2^ For instance, at the beginning of his period  
the only gazette  published in Madrid had been silent for three years  
concerning French news, and the entrance of foreign books and newspapers  
was strictly prohibited.2^ During his six years, he tried to correct  
this. In September 1797 he obtained a royal decree permitting every  
artist, manufacturer, or capitalist of whatever religion, to come to  
Spain, so long as they would respect the Roman Catholic religion and the  
countryrs manners. He  especially hoped the Jews would come. This act  
was, he said, 41 the first law of toleration proclaimed for the last three  
hundred years."2? He abolished the "Holy Office,» and strove constantly  
against the Inquisition. It must be admitted, however, that he was ahead  
of his times, and popular  feeling rose against him.  
Spain1 s attitude to the papacy may be further deduced from the  
fact that when, after the French had exiled Pirns VI from .Rome, it was  
suggested that the Pope be afforded an asylum in Spain, the king of that  
country, Charles IV, agreed to receive him only upon such conditions as  
98  could not in reason be complied with.^u  
Don Manuel de Godoy, J. D. D1 esmenard, ed. and trans., Memoirs  
of Don Manuel ie Godoy*  
26 Ibid., I, 128.  
Ibid*, H, 271-272.  
28 Richard Duppa, A Brief Account of the Subversion of the Papal  
Government, 1798, p#


59  
Especially in Heme, Pope Pirns VI was unpopular, and cauld scarce  
appear in public without being hissed.^ On December 279 1797, a mob 
attempted in vain to  overturn the papal authority.But more important  
V ^  
than the aetive hostility was the passive indifference. When the French  
came in, set up a tree of Liberty, and proclaimed the end of the Pope,  
the populace was listless and seemingly unconcerned. "So little attention  
was paid to this  tree of Liberty,11 writes Buppa, "that I passed it on the  
next day about noon, and not a single person was looking at it."31 The  
same writer, now using Asara's memoirs for his authority, describe® the  
Pope when surrendering to the Freaek as "humbled, disarmed, institute of  
friends and of support. . • ."32  
N©#, the papacy seemed to rise to new heigit^ in the nineteenth  
century, especially with the proclamation of the Immaculate; Conception 
in 18A and of Papal Infallibility in 1870. Does this contreve^l the  
significance of the Revolutionary era as just set forth? No, for it was  
but a fafade which soon tumbled all to pieces. The proclamations were  
met with angry protests, even from within the Catholic Glmrch, and ulti-
mately the pope himself was imprisoned for fifty-nine years. That a new  
(and unfavorable) era did  indeed begin for the Church about the time of  
29 Pius VI, Historical and Philosophical Memoirs of Pius the Sixth  
and of His Pontificate - (translated from the French), II, 31h ff • Cited  
in L. I. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, II, 7$Q*  
3° Duppa, op. cit., pp. 8-11. 
^ Ibid., p. hi*  
32 jbid., p. kk.


60  
the French Revolution is attested to by no less authorities than Lord  
Acton and J. B. Bury* Lord Acton says*  
(The Church) had resisted the outward assault ©£ the Protestant  
Reformation to be sapped by the Revolution which had its seat in  
Catholic countries* and extensively prevailed in the Church her- 
self. The spirit of opposition to the Holy See grew in energy*  
and the opposition to its system and ideas spread- still more  
widely*33  
And Bury* after noting that the Pope accepted the widely divergant  
commentaries written on the Syllabus by the Liberal Catholic Bupanloup  
and the ultramontane Schrader* asks*  
How is it that t$r$ such different interpretations as that of  
the Liberal Catholic Dupanloup and the ultramontane Schrader  
could fee alike accept&d by the Vatican? Hew is it that ultra- 
montanes themselves* when they choose* can explain away what  
seems-the plain and obvious meaning of.  the Syllabusj iand. accept  
principles to which it seems opposed? The answer lies in the  
distinction between thesis and hypothesis. The Syllabus is con- 
cerned with thesis* and laying down of principles* which are of  
absolute validity* and7would ^prevail in an ideal society when 
the Church possessed the power of enforcing its authority* as  
it did to such a vast extent in the Middle Ages. But in modem  
times the Church in practice has to deal with hypothesis* i.e.* 
it has to determine its actions to meet certain given conations  
which it camot control; it has to compromise and conciliate its  
theoretical principles. . . in the interests of self preservation;  
the Concordat of 1801 began this policy. But notwithstanding  
this unwilling and necessary condescension* the Papacy.never a- 
bandoned the theoretical principles which are the logical con- 
sequences of its claim to independent sovran authority* they  
remain in the background as the ideal* like a utopia* which the  
Church would realize if iteould.3U (Emphasis on Comeordat supplied.)  
Thus Bury describes the difference between the modem papacy and  
that of-the Middle Ages —and he dates the new era,  from  1801.  
33 Aeton* The Papal States* p# 26*  
j# B. Bury* The Papacy in the Nineteenth Century* I86I4-I8781  
pp. 1*2-1*3 •


What is the difference  between the medieval and the modern papacy?  
The modern papacy cannot do what it would like toj in other words, as the  
prophecy has it, its "authority* is taken  away. "Prudence and policy,"  
continues Acton, "dictate that this theory, #iich cannot at the present  
day be reduced to practice, should be kept in the background."35 (Empha- 
sis supplied.)  
Conclusion. It has been shown that especially in France, but also  
in Austria, Prussia, England, and even in Spain and Italy, the closing  
years of the 18th century saw a trend both hostile to the papacy and  
indifferent to Catholicism. Bury says that the same  period marked the  
end of the medieval papacy and the beginning of a new era for the Church.  
It may be concluded, then, that the first requirement of the prophecy  
has been met, namely, a noticeable release in Europe around the year  
1798, from the bondage of the Beast.  
II. AN INTERNATIONAL MISSIONARY MOVEMENT AND A DISAPPOINTMENT  
The first requirement has been met in favor of 1798. But there  
are others. For instance, the angel who declared the time was over was  
seen standing on  the land and on the sea, holding a little book open,  
which, upon being eaten, caused first great pleasure, and then great  
bitterness. But after it was eaten, the  message was to go on.  
In fulfillment of this, the closing decade of the eighteenth  
century and the opening decades of the nineteenth saw an upsurgence in  
35 ibid., p. 22.


62  
missionary activites and the formation of Bible societies so striking  
and so well known as to require no more than passing mention here*  
-In 1793 William Carey sailed to India and the era of modern  
missions was begun; in 1795* 1796, and 1797 missionary societies were  
formed in London* New Yorkj and the Netherlands; in l807 Robert Morrisson  
left for China — and so it went on* In IQUO David Livingstone began his  
work in South Africa. And as for the Bible societies* between l80ii and  
181|0 no fewer than sixty-three were formed in America* Europe* and Asia.P^  
And this great movement was understood* by contemporary exposi- 
tors 5 to be a sign that the 1260 years had closed* Cuninghame* for in-
stance (who ended the years in 1792} stood amazed at the progress of the  
Bible societies as of 1817* and was sure it was an indication that the  
period of the Beast had expired*^?  
What is less well-known* but is nonetheless true* is the fact that  
this movement had in it much of prophetic interpretation* and of under- 
standing of the symbolism of Daniel heretofore hidden, Froom*3® after  
many years of research* has amply demonstrated this to be the case. In  
Europe* America* and in countel^ss mission stations around  the world*  
was preached a lf judgment-hour11 message based on  the soon-coming end of  
3^ Baird* Christian Retrospect and Register* pp. 2kk-2k6* Cited  
in LeRoy Edwin Froom* Syllabus for theHSIass in the Development of Prophetic  
Interpretation* II* 6.  
William Cuninghame* A Dissertation on the Seals and Trumpets  
of the Apocalypse* pp. 262-2827  
38 L@Roy frmm9 jhe Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers* Vols. Ill*


63  
the 2300 days of Daniel 8:1!^ an event commonly placed in lQh3-hk) 181*7, 
or 1866.  
The Old-World movement was abortive j it died down in the 1830*8  
before coming to the appointed time. But even as it did so, "the torch  
that was now bedimmed in the Old World was uplifted in the New, and the  
message that was dying out in Britain began to swell into a mighty cry  
in far-off America.  
In America the prophetic symbols were expounded by hundreds, but  
the most conspicuous movement, centered on an understanding of the 2300  
days as ending in l8i*3-i|ii, was one known as Millerism. Now the prophet  
ate the little book, and it was, he says, "in n§r xaouth as sweet as honey;  
and as soon as I had eaten it, ray belly was bitter."^0 Since the Miller- 
ites were the most conspicuous movement of their day stressing prophetic  
interpretation, it is among them that the sweetness and bitterness should  
most logically be expected to find their fulfillment. And so it was.  
One Millerite wrote of the year 181*1*: "This was the happiest year of my  
life. My heart was full of glad expectation. . . .»W- 
The Millerites expected the Lord to come on October 22, l8kk ~  
but the time passed I Now indeed came a great disappointment. The same  
writer says,  
The waiting people of God approached the hour  when they fondly  
hoped their joys would be complete in the coming of the Saviour.  
But the time . . . passed unmarked by the advent of Jesus. . . .  
39 7W-.  
Revelation 10:10  
^ Ellen G# White, Testimonies to the Church, I, £1*.


64  
It was a bitter disappointment that fell upon the little flock ,  
whose faith had been so strong and whose hope had been so high.^  
The angel said to the prophet, l?Thou must prophesy again before  
many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.This too, was  ful- 
filled in this movement. Not in Millerism per se, for it died out short- 
ly after the disappointment. But out of Millerism grew a movement that 
has brought  prophetic knowledge to almost every nation in the world, and  
is expanding every year, namely, the  Seventh-day Adventists.  
Conclusion. It has been shown very briefly that, beginning slight- 
ly before 1798, and having its main growth in the decades following, an  
international missionary movement arose characterized by Bible study, and,  
in a remarkable way, by the understanding of prophecy. The movement most  
conspicuous for its basis in prophecy during the first  half of the nine- 
teenth century was Millerism, and it ecsperieaeed both the sweetness of  
joy and the bitterness of disappointment in the year 181U;. But the  
promulgation of prophecy did net eease then; it:  has continued on, "before  
many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings."  
.It is therefore safe to conclude that 1798 is adequate also in the  
second aspect of the studyj namely, it is a date prior to a great world  
movement, prophetic illumination, and disappointment.. % corollary, it  
Ibid., pp. 56-57• For an account of JfLllerism, the expectation,  
and the subsequent disappointment5 see Arthur llhitef ield Spalding, Captains 
of the Host, chapters 1, 5j and Francis D. Nichol, The Midnight Cry.  
^ Revelation 10:11.


may be said that 18?0 has thus been disproved, for it came after the  
movement had been underlay for decades, and also after the disappoint-
ment of iSijij. •  
III. THE DEADLY WOUND EPITOMIZED: THE PAPAL CAPTIVITY AND KILLING  
Two of the three requirements having been met in favor of 1798,  
there remains but one, that of the carrying away into captivity and the 
apparent killing by a sword. Was the pope carried into captivity in  
^1798? Mas the papacy apparently killed by military means in  1798?  
That he was is so well known, and has been alluded to so many  
times in this paper, that it requires but little comment now*  
When the amies of France were enjoying victories in Italy in  
1797, Napoleon received a communication from the Directory dated 13  
Pluviose of the Year V, and signed by La Revellilre-Lepeaux, Barras, and  
Reubeil, saying that "the Roman religion would always be the irreconcil- 
able enemy of the Republic," It must  be struck in France; it must be  
struck in Rome. The message continued,  
There are, no doubt, means which can be employed at home to  
diminish its influence insensibly, either by legislation or by  
institutions which will efface old impressions by substituting  
new ones more agreeable to the actual order of things, more con- 
formable to reason and sound morality* But there is one thing  
more essential to the attainment of the end desired, and that  
is to destroy, if possible, the centre of unity of the Roman 
Churchj and it is for you, who unite in your person and most 
distinguished qualities of the general and of the enlightened  
politician, to realize this aim if you consider it practicable.^  
^ Aulard, op. cit*, p.


66  
The Directory left the natter to Napoleon's discretion, and he  
decided to wait. However, when Duphot was killed in Rome in December  
of 1797 it was decided to make his death a pretext for an attack on the  
papacy. On February 10, 1798 therefore, General Berthier arrived with a  
Republican army at the gates of Rome, and, in view of his promises to  
molest neither religion nor persons, was admitted in peace. His procla- 
mations had been worded thus:  
All the inhabitants of the Ecclesiastical State, may be as- 
3 sured that their persons, their property, their churches and  
religion shall be protected by the French army.  
ALEX. BERTHIER.  
The functions of the Church shall be religiously respected;  
theref ore aH public demonstrations of devotion ought to con- 
tinue without any change or alteration.  
ALEX. BERTHIER^  
But five days later, on February the anniversary of the as- 
cension of Pius VI to the pontificate, all was changed. A tree of  
Liberty was planted on the Capitol, a republic  was proclaimed, and the  
Pope was taken prisoner. Writes Duppa, who was present in Rome at the  
time, 
That the head of the Church might be made to feel with more  
poignancy his humiliating situation, the day chosen for planting  
a tree of Liberty on the Capitol was the anniversary of his  
election to the sovereignty. Whilst he was, according to custom, 
in the Sistine chapel, celebrating his accession to the papal  
chair, and receiving the congratulations of the Cardinals,  
Citizen Haller, the commissary-general, and Cervoni, who then  
Proclamation dated  "Headquarters before Rome, the 22nd Pluviose,  
the sixth year of the French republic, one and indivisible.n (10th of  
February, 1798.) Cited in Duppa, op. cit., p. 35*


67  
commanded the French troops within the city* gratified themselves  
in a peculiar triumph ever this unfortunate potentate. During  
that ceremony they both entered the chapel* and HaLler announced  
to* the sovereign Pontiff on his throne* that his reign was at an  
end*  
The poor old man seemed shocked at the abruptness of this un- 
expected notice* but soon recovered himself with becoming forti-
tude; and when General Gervoni* adding ridicule to oppression* .  
presented him with the national cockade, he rejected it with a  
dignity that shewed he was still superior to his misfortunes.  
At the same time that his Holiness received this notice of the  
dissolution of his power* his Swiss guards were dismissed* and  
Republican soldiers put in their place.^  
c At the Capitol* as the tree of Liberty was planted* Berthier  
issued a new proclamation* making the former papal states as of the  
treaty of CaSpo Formio a new Roman Republic under the protection of the  
French army* and containing the sentence* "In consequence* every other  
temporal authority emanating from the old government of the Pope* is 
suppressed* arid he shall no more exercise any function. .  
The papacy was officially at an end — and it was. an  army (a'  
"sword") that had done it* On February 20* at night* the Pope was con- 
•i ... .• . .. ..  
veyed away under guard* first to Sienna* in Italy* and later to Florence*  
Parma* Turin* and at last to the French fortress at Valence* where he  
died on July 28* 1799The papacy had indeed "gone into captivity."  
1J6  Duppa* op. cit** pp.  
' ' hi ' . ' . "  
Signed, "Alexander Berthier." "Dated* Roma, the l£th-of-February*  
1796j the first year of Liberty, proclaimed ih the Roman Forum* and rati- 
fied on the Capitol* with free voice* and subscribed to by innumerable  
Citizens.11 Cited in Duppa* op. cit** p. 39* ;  
i o 1 • ... . _  
Alsog* op. cit.* p. 6£l*


68  
A Deadly Wound? Though Berthler and Napoleon and the Directory were  
harsh to the Pope, and though they intended to put a final end to the papa- 
cy, they did not really do so, for it revived rapidly. Now Revelation 13:  
10 says, "lie that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that  
killeth with the sword must be killed with  the sword." (Emphasis supplied.)  
The papacy was taken off into captivity, but was it actually killed?  
Verse 3 shows that an actual killing was not necessary. The Authorized  
Version says, "I saw one of his heads as it were slain" (margin). The  
Revised Standard Version has "One of its heads seemed to have a mortal  
wound." (Emphasis supplied.)  
And so it was. Berthler had proclaimed that the Pope should "no  
more exercise any function." In the words of Trevor's familiar statement:  
The Papacy was extinct: not a vestige of its existence remained;  
and among all the Roman Catholic powers not a finger was stirred in  
its defense. The Eternal City had no longer prince or pontiff; its  
bishop was a dying captive in foreign lands; and the decree was al- 
ready announced that no successor would be allowed in his place.49* 50  
* .When, in August 1799, Pope Pius VI passed away, a captive In Prance,  
"half Europe thought • . . that with the Pope the Papacy was dead.?51  
Joseph Rickaby, S.J., The Modern Papacy, p. 1. Cited in A. S.  
Maxwell, Great Prophecies for Our Time, p. 111.  
It was intended that the papacy should cease to exist. And this  
is precisely in harmony with the Greek as translated on page 39, to wit:  
^ "And one of its heads having its throat cut as if in order to cause  
death." (Emphasis supplied.) Indeed, the sword of France did slash at  
the papacy In order to put an end to it, but it did not die. "The deadly  
wouM was healed." See the discussion and exegesis on.  page 39.  
51 George Trevor, Rome: From the Fall of the Western Empire, p. 440.  
In demonstration of the truth of this statement, it may be noted in passing  
that Don Manuel de Godoy in his Memoirs, seems to make no mention whatso- 
ever of the pope' s captivity, showing what little concern even  Catholic  
Spain had in the procedings i


69  
Conclusion. Thus, in 1798, the prophecy apparently was fulfilled.  
The papacy as the visible head of the Beast was (nas it were11) killed,  
and Pope Pius YX as its living contemporary representative was carried  
into captivity.  
SUMMAHT AND CONCLUSIONS  
It has been shown in this chapter that the requirements of pro- 
phecy as set forth in Chapter III were fulfilled in such a manner as to  
indicate 1798 as the end of the 1260 years* A Deadly Wound was inflicted 
on the Beast1s doctrines in that Catholicism suffered a marked decline  
during the eighteenth century, and especially at its close. An inter- 
national missionary movement arose towards the end of the same centuiy,  
in which prophecy played an important part, this movement undergoing a  
conspicuous disappointment but not discontinuing thereafter, but rather  
expanding its prophetic teaching. Coinciding with both of these move- 
ments came the infliction of the Deadly Wound on the Beast's visible  
head when the papacy was ("as it were") killed and the pope taken into  
captivity in the year 1798*  
Thus the year 1798 may be considered as being adequate to meet  
the demands of prophecy for a closing date of the 1260  years — provided  
I only that one other factor be satisfied, namely, that 538, the year 1260  
years earlier, be adequate for the initial date*  
To an examination of 538, the next chapter is devoted.


CHAPTER ¥  
IS 538 AN ADEQUATE INITIAL DATE?  
Chapter I? has shown that 1798 apparently satisfies the require- 
ments of the prophecy for a terminal date, provided only that 538, the  
date 1260 years earlier, be found adequate as the initial date*  
It has been shown, also, that the requirements of the prophecy  
for the initial date seem to be that it should be prior to a time of  
increasing Catholicism corresponding to the period of declining Catholi- 
cism that preceded 1798, and that it should mark in a special way the  
donation of power, seat, and authority by the Dragon to the Beast iter  
hi 6.  
This chapter examines the adequacy of 538 as an initial date for  
the 1260 years In the light of these apparent requirements of prophecy.  
WHY 538?  
The reason for studying 538. A.D* 538 is selected simply because  
it is 1260 years prior to"1798.  
Other dates. There are other dates that seem more likely. For :  
instance, there are 313 and 325, important dates in the time of Constantine,  
when Catholicism arose to a new prestige  indeed* But these dates are too  
early, ccming before the division of Rome among the ten tribes. The pon- 
tificate of Gregory the Great  is even more likely* He is indeed styled


71  
the "Father of the Medieval Church."1 But he did not  begin his term of  
office until 590 and he died in 60ii* and 1260 years after these dates is  
1850-18611.5 dates too late for the international prophetic movement with 
its disappointment in I8I4I* as described in the previous chapterj2 more-
over* there was no captivity of the pope effected during these latter  
years.  
An objection answered. It may be objected at the outset that to  
select 538 for special attention because it is 1260 years earlier than  
1798 is honest enough but hardly logical* because it is "reasoning back- 
wards." This objection can be controverterd* however* on. the grounds that  
it is the very basis of logic to reason from the known to the unknown.  
In logic* apparently opposite means are used to arrive at sound  
conclusions. For instance* deductive reasoning is ^reasoning backwards"  
when compared with inductive reasoning* and reasoning from cause to effect  
bears the same relationship to reasoning from effect to cause. Yet no 
one discards any one of these methods simply because it is the opposite  
of the other* for these methods are all acceptable if* in the various  
cases in which they are used* they constitute reasoning  from the known  
to the unknown.  
1 John Farrow* Pageant of the Popes* p. kl3 ef. Dana C. Munro*  
"Rome*11 Encyclopedia Britannica* Il939) TX* p. £l8.  
2 It might be suggested that the Pontificate of Gregory is such a  
likely initial era that perhaps the l8kk disappointment was not in reality  
a fulfillment of Revelation 10. But the iQkh events are tieTto the 2300  
days* which in turn are anchored securely to the events of the life of  
Christ* and hence cannot be controverted or gainsaid*


72  
In studying the 1260 days, the closing date is more readily ascer- 
tained than is the opening date. Therefore, to insist on determining  
the initial date before establishing, the terminal date is, in point of 
logic, less reasonable under the circumstances than the argument followed  
in this paper.^  
(ENERAL CONSIDERATIONS  
What is to be looked for around 538, if that is the correct date?  
The beginning of a continuous persecution? The beginning of temporal  
3 A homely illustration or twoa will reveal that "reasoning back- 
wards" is commonly accepted, especially in chronological or metrical  
problems. When a child comes down with a contagious disease, his mother  
immediately consults medical advice to discover the length of the period  
of incubation, counts backwards the number of days involved in order to 
arrive at the probable  date of contagion, and then analyzes her boy's  
activities of that time in order to determine what child in the school  
or neighborhood might have been responsible for his affliction. Again,  
when a speaker has an appointment at a distant auditorium, he finds out  
the length of time needed for the trip and counts backwards from the hour  
of the appointment to determine when he should set out. These illus- 
trations are not wholly satisfactory, since a  period of incubation and  
the time to travel a given distance,  may vary from what might be called  
the "norm.11 In contrast, the  1260-year period of the Bible prophecy  
under discussion is strictly delimited by divine fiat. Therefore, if  
"reasoning backwards" is useful, accepted, and reasonable  in every day  
matters subject to human error, why should it not be even more useful,  
acceptable, and reasonable when employed in the study of holy prophecy?  
When a cartographer is assigned to locate a village 150 miles,  
say, from a given city, he sets his dividers for the required distance  
according to the scale of the map and then places one leg of the dividers 
on the central city and measures outwards towards the village. To insist  
that he must first locate the little village and then prove that it  is  
150 miles from the city, on the grounds that the village was named first  
in the assignment, is unreasonable. The only reasonable thing for him to  
do is to measure from the knwn to the unknown.  
a The use of this type of illustration in a master's thesis is  
defended on the basis that Jesus never spake without a parable (Matthew  
13:3U)*- and that the "common people heard Him gladly" (Mark 12:37}•


73  
power? or of supremacy of popes over kings? The conversion of the entire  
West to Catholicism? It has been  shown that none of these is to be ex- 
pected/'  
Nor is a general acceptance of Catholicism to  be required as  
marking the beginning of the epoch. As was shown in relationship to 
1798, for fifty or more years prior  to that date there was an increasing  
c recession of Catholic influence in Europej and, dating from the Reforma- 
tion, considerable areas of Europe had seceded from both papacy and  
Catholicism. If this gradual decline marks the latter end of the 1260  
years, a correspondingly gradual incline may be accepted as marking —  
indeed expected to  mark' — its beginning.  
Nor yet is some brilliant pope needed to mark the beginning. Pius  
VI, while not the least splendid of the popes, has not gone down in histo- 
ry among the brightest stars of the papacy. If, then, a minor pope, or a  
succession of minor popes, precede the ending, a similar procession may  
follow the beginning.^  
^ SuPra> III.  
^ Of eight popes listed for the l8th century,  Alzog designates  
only one, Benedict XIV, (1714.0-17^8) as being important,11 and that main- 
ly, it seems, on account of his learning. See Alzog, History of the  
Church, pp. I489, 10U9, 101*1.


74  
THE BEAST IN THE SIXTH CENTURY  
I. UNDER THE OSTROGOTHS  
The power of the Ostrogoths. In order to arrive at an  adequate  
evaluation of Catholic and papal growth in the sixth century it is neces- 
sary first to be acquainted with the Ostrogoths. The Ostrogoths were not  
4l/ 1  
c merely an Italian tribe. Theodoric, who was regrant as the century began,  
conducted a wise and prosperous reign, and by marriage and conquest so  
extended his influence  over the entire West that Jordanes could say, **Now  
there was not a tribe in the west that did not serve Theodoric while he  
lived, either in friendship or by conquest.Indeed, in addition to  
Italy and a fair portion of Gaul,? Theodoric also ruled as rex of the  
Visigoths of Spain and Gaul for the fifteen years preceding his death in  
526.® Moreover, he considered himself the father of the other western  
kings such as Clovis and  Alarie and write them in such a vein, in at- 
tempts to pacify and conciliate them.9 He established the tributary  
Alemans as a buffer state between himself and Clovis, an advantage which  
was not reliquished until 536, under Witiges.  
The Ostrogoths and the papacy. Theodoric was an Arian, but above  
\  
that, he was a statesman and showed great leniency towards all religions1.  
^ Jordanes, Gothic History, Charles Christopher Mierow, trans.,  pp* 136-139•  
? Note: Including Aries, the chief Catholic bishopric in Gaul*  
o 
J. B. Bury, et al*, Cambridge Medieval History, II, l6l*  
^ Cassiodorus, Letters, Thomas Hodgkin, trans., ii, hi} iii, h»


75  
In a letter permitting Jex^s to roof their synagogues, he says,  
Why do ye desire what ye ought to shun? In truth we give  
• the permission which you craved, but we suitably blame the de- 
sire of your wandering minds. We cannot order a religion, be-
cause not one is forced to believe against his id.ll»lu  
He did attempt to settle an election difficulty concerning Pope  
Symmachus, and before his death he named the pope whom he wished to be  
next elected, but he does not seem to have meddled much with the papacy.  
Cassiodorus, anyway, has not preserved a single letter in all his twelve  
books from Theodoric to either Symmachus or Hormisdas I Kings Athalaric  
and Theodahad, however, did write either to the popes or about them to 
Justinian, but concerning morals and legal matters, and not doctrines or  
persecution, and if they manifested a dominating  spirit, they were at  
least polite. One letter by Athalaric especially contains such phrases  
as the "sacrosanct Soman Church,m the "honour of the Apostolic See," and  
"the most blessed Pope."^-1- 
In fact, Cassiodorus puts into the mouths of the Senate the fol- 
lowing appeal addressed to Justinian in an attempt to stop the imperial 
invasion:  
I love the Amal, bred up as  he has been at my knees, . . .  
dear to the Romans by his prudence. .  . . Join rather thy  
prayers to his) share with him thy counsel. * . . Do not woo  
me in the only way I cannot be won. . . . Control the emotions  
of anger, oh illustrious conquerer I  
Let the sacred petition of the blessed Apostles Peter and  
Paul be also taken Into your account. For surely they, who  
are proved to have so often defended the  peace of Rome from  
10 Ibid., ii, 27. 
II Ibid., viii, 2k$ ix, 17) x, 19, 20, 2$.


76  
her enemies, deserve that your Sovereignty should yield every- 
thing to their merits.-*-2  
However, there is an important other side to the picture• Pope  
Symmachus "redeemed with money captives in Liguria and Milan  
and divers provinces and bestowed gifts upon them and set them free.?f^3  
Loomls suggests armed banditry to be the cause,^ but it is not impossible  
that the difference of religion formed a pretext for the raids. And it  
must not be forgotten that Theodoric was an Arian, and  that he considered  
himself not only the father of the West, but also the defender of his 
faith. When, in the years between 5>1? and 52k, the Burgundians began a  
^ persecution against the trians, Theodoric dispatched an array to avenge  
them and took several cities.^ Even more important was the treatment  
. Theodoric afforded John I  (523-526) when Justin began Catholicizing Arian  
church edifices in Greece, and impelling the conversion of Arians them- 
selves. Theodoric summoned John to Ravenna and ordered him to Constan- 
tinople mth instructions to get the churches back or else he would "put  
all Italy to the sword. When the aged Pope returned only relatively 
successful, the king put him in the Ravenna prison where he shortly died.  
12 Ibid., xi, 13.  
13 Liber Pontificalis, Louise Ropes Loomis, trans., p. 123•  
Loo. cit»  
^ Bury, op. cit», p. !!?•  
16 Liber Pontificalis, pp. 131-138* See also the footnote by Loomis.


77  
It is manifest that the papacy was unable to persecute Arians during the  
ascendancy of the Ostrogoths*  
And there is another phase also* The great champions of orthodoxy  
in the West were the Franks* How they yearned to expand their territories 
in the name of the homoousios.  Prince of Peace 1 But  , throughout the latter  
part of Theodoric1s reign, the Franks were never victorious.^ Thus  
Theodoric was a "let11 or hindrance to Prankish success, and, by extension,  
to the power of the popes and of Catholicism. Catholicism and popery  
could not develop much in Europe until the Ostrogoths were "taken out of  
the way.M  
Moreover, in addition to this direct means, the Ostrogoths by  
their wise rule restrained the Catholic power, for, as Hodgkins says,  
though the Romans were undoubtedly not too pleased with their secondary  
status in Italy, they seem to have accepted it as the best medicine for  
their ills, admitting that  
Any attempts to conjure with the great name of the Roman  
Empire could only end in subjection to the really alien rule of  
I^rsantium. All attempts to rouse the religious passions of the  
Catholic against the heretical intruders were likely to benefit  
the Catholic but savage Frank.  
It is veiy evident that the Ostrogoths had to be weakened before  
either the papacy oi: Catholicism could attain their medieval glory*  
jordanes, op. cit*, pp. 138-139. He even says that the Goths  
were never victorious "as long as" Theodoric reigned.  
Thomas Hodgkin, introduction to Cassiodorus, Letters, p. 21.


78  
The end of the Ostrogoths. And the Ostrogoths did come to their  
end. An account of the Imperial invasion of Italy is in the appendix,  
together with maps shewing the tide of conquest as it ebbed and flowed  
over a period of almost twenty years.  
II .  UHDEE THE IMPERIAL EES TORATIOH AMD THE LOMBARDS  
If the Ostrogoths impeded Catholicism' and the papacy because they  
were Arians, it might be supposed that the fall of the Goths and the im- 
perial restoration would reverse this situation. It is a surprise, there- 
fore, to find that as soon as the Gothic protection was removed, Justinian  
summoned Vigilius (537-555) to Constantinople, threatened him, imprisoned  
him, banished him, excommunicated him, and actually succeded in forcing 
him (the Infallible) into imorthodoxy.19 This conduct of Justinian will  
be appraised in a moment.  
In 55ih when the Gothic race had been completely destroyed, a prag- 
matic sanction was issued which "promulgated the Justinian code, separated  
the civil from the military power, and by conferring on the bishops the 
authority over the provincial and municipal government, soon led to the  
20  increase of the power of the Church.11  
In 568, however, only fourteen years later, a new era began with  
the Lombard invasion. Most of Italy was reduced to slavery but with  
19 Thomas Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, I?, 580 ff.  
20 Dana c. Mnnro, «Rorae,» Encyclopedia Britannica, (1939) IX.  
p. 5io. ——~— ——


79  
important exceptions. "In the unsubdued parts of the country*11 writes  
Munro* "Namely* in Ravenna* Rome aid the maritime cities — a very dif- 
ferent state of things prevailed."21 Throughout their two-hundred year 
stay in Italy the Lombards were essentially alien and never subdued the  
whole kingdom* Indeed* while Pavia was their capital* Ravenna was a  
Greek capital* and Rome the Latin capital*22 These cities became in- 
creasingly self-dependent* and in Rome* says Munro again* "we behold the  
rapid growth of  the papal power. . . *"23  
The Lombard invasion was facilitated by the  denuded state of  
Italy after the Gothic war. Procopius describes a depopulated and ravaged  
Italy* over  which* says lodgkin* the "wolves of war were growling."2^- In- 
deed*  "the imperial restoration marked* at any rate in Italy* the beginning  
of a decadence which long darkened her history."2^  
The spotty nature of the Lombard occupation of Italy facilitated  
the rise of the papal power. Italy was rent asunder* and Rome* cut off  
by land and sea from the Empire* was  left quite isolated. The pope and  
the "Duke" of Rome had to make many decisions. "In this time of stress  
and storm*" says Oman* "the Popes won their first secular authority over  
pi  Loc* cit*  
22 Richard William Church* "Lombards**1 Encyclopedia Britannica  
(1939), XIV* 3h3. ~ — —  
Munro* loc* cit*  
Hodgkin* op. cit** pp. 301-302*  
Bury*  op. cit** pp. 22-21*.


80  
Rome and its vicinity, and reduced the civil magistrates to a place of  
quite secondary importance."^ Gregory negotiated at least two truces  
with the Lombards on his own authority, to the displeasure of Emperor  
and exarch alike, who, however did nothing about it*^7 Indeed, they had  
little right even to complain, for they had left the defenders of Rome  
unpaid, and Gregory had to supply their wages from the episcopal treasur- 
28 29  y. Gregory even sent a tribune to govern the garrison in Naples.  
The status of toe papacy in the sixth century* It has been men- 
tioned that during the time of the Ostrogoths the papacy was relatively  
free, but not dominant) that under Justinian it was humiliated and exiled  
and that with Gregory it rose to  new glories and prestige. More can be  
said* 
Mention should be made again, for instance, of the excommunication  
of Vigilius by the bishops of North Africa and of Italy, and the unpopu- 
larity of Pelagius 1,3° all during the years 5145-560, or after 538. As 
for the three pontificates from 560-5>0, Schaff designates them as "among  
the darkest and most sterile in the annals of the papacy*  H 31  
Charles Oman, The Dark Ages, 2+76-918, pp. 200-203.  
27 Loc. cit.  
28 Munro, loc* cit.  
Oman, loc* cit.  
3° Supra, p.  
31 Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, III, 328.


81  
Bat it does not seem proper to say that these events disqualify a  
date as early as 538 — unless, indeed, we are to look for a date in the  
twelfth or thirteenth centuries, — for long after Gregory "established 
the medieval papacy11 the papacy may be seen passing through the lowest  
degradation as the plaything of Italy's wealthier class.  
Indeed, while Justinian's treatment of Yigilius reveals the pope's  
weakness as compared with Hildebrand and Innocent III, it nevertheless  
reveals him as a highly important man in the Western empire. Justinian  
carried Yigilius away from Rome so that he could keep an eye on him and  
force his obedience*32 justinian call all his citizens to the capital 
so, he could keep an eye on them? Justinian, the Emperor, struggled with  
Yigilius for years, new threatening him, now plotting intrigues against  
, him, now forcing hii to swear/"to the most pious lord Emperor" "by the  
sacred nails . . . and the sacred bridle,now calling a council to  
excommunicate him, now banishing him into exile, and now, again, recalling  
him and letting him return to Rome. Did Justinian treat evezy refractory  
citizen of his empire the same way?  
Yigilius was not Innocent III or Boniface VIII, but he was still  
an important dignitary in the Roman Empire of the sixth century* And the  
excommunication of the pope by the western bishops after 538 cannot be  
op  Bury, op* cit., pp. k&-kl*  
33 
Mansi, IX (ML, 69:121), cited in Joseph Cullen Ayer, A Source  
Book for Ancient Church History, p. 5i|6*


82  
said to disqualify that date, for did not the bishops of Henry IV excom- 
municate Hildebrand in 1080 and elect Guibert, the metropolitan of Ravenna,  
Pontiff in his  place?^  
Bit the prophecy does not seem to have so much interest in indi- 
vidual popes as in the papacy, and that makes a great deal of difference.  
Bishops and kings might, and did, differ with individual popes, but no  
one till 1798 assayed to put an end to the papacy. This is a fundamental 
difference between all the humiliations of the pope before 1798 and the  
captivity of that date. For in 1798 the French were determined to put  
an end to the center of the unity of the Catholic Church, regardless of  
whatever Pope they might happen to find sitting there at the time; but  
prior to 1798 there was no thought of abolishing the papacy, but only of  
controlling it, or of banishing individual popes.  
And the papacy was exalted during the sixth century. As the centu- 
ry began, the Roman Church found itself "completely organized."^5 gy £03  
a synod at Rome under Symmachus adopted for the Roman papacy the title  
"Vicar of  Christ. "36 in 533 Justinian recognized the papacy as the "Head  
of all the Holy Churches/" embodying the statement under the first title  
oi  
Louis Marie De Cormenin, The Public and Private History of the  
Popes of Rome, trans, from the French, I, 375. ' 8 ~  
35 A. Boudinhon, "Law," Catholic Encyclopedia, II, 6l#  
E. B. Elliott, Horae Apocalypticaes III, 157-159, following  
John Laurence Mosheim, An Ecclesiastical History, Ancient and Modem,  
VL century. ~ ~"


83  
in the first book of the second edition of his Code which he published  
to the empire in 53il«37  
Those who magnify the humiliations of the popes during a part of  
this century forget* perhaps* that long before this the Roman papacy was  
an "old established institution,11 and that as early as the fourth  centur- 
y "it was customary to couple lists of popes mth lists of consuls and  
kings and other secular magnates."38 Moreover* the quick rise of the 
papacy under Gregory is proof that the prestige of the papacy was by no  
means extinct. Had a Gregory arisen in Aries* shall we say, in 590*  
would Aries have become the center of Western Catholicism?^  
The status of Catholicism in the sixth century. As  has been men- 
tioned* the beginning of the century saw in the West only the Franks  
holding to the Nieene Creed. But as  the century progressed the picture  
changed. The Borgundians became Catholic in 5l6~5l8. By 553 the  
Ostrogoths had been destroyed* thus relieving a large area of heresy.  
The Visigoths became Catholic in 589* and the Lombards were on their way  
to Catholicity before the end of the century. In fact* Gregory so enlarged  
S. P. Scott* The Civil Law* XII* 12.  
38 Louis^Ropes Loomis,  introduction  to Liber Pontificalis, p. xiii.  
39 1 case in point is Caesarius, Bishop of Aries from $03-$h3$ when  
that city was still one of the most important social, commercial* and in- 
dustrial centers in the West* During his episcopacy he was undoubtedly  
the foremost bishop in Gaul* convening councils, defining the faith* preach-
ing to the common people* and composing miles of conduct for monasteries 
and convents. He is remembered as a ff.great Qallo-Roman ecclesiastical 
legislator and reformer11 at a time when the Roman bishops were relatively 
silent and weak. let Aries did not come to supersede Rome. See Thomas J.  
Shahan* "Caesarius of Aries," Catholic Encyclopedia, III, 135-137.


84  
the Catholic influence that he could  claim to have united Italy, Spain,  
and Britain to the Church of Rome; and, since he also had considerable  
influence in France, North Africa, and Illyricum, he may well be styled, 
says Oman, "the first Patriarch of  the United West.''^O  
Since Gregoiy was such an illustrious pope, and seeing under him  
the papacy and Catholicism both took great strides forward, is not his  
pontificate a better starting point for the 1260  years, than 538? We  
think not, for in his day the Beast seems too well developed. For decades  
prior to 1798 Catholicism was loosing its grip in Europej it seems ap- 
propriate that several decades should be allowed for the rise of Catholi- 
cism after the beginning of the period.^1  
A Century of increasing darkness. During this centuiy ignorance  
and darkness advanced rapidly. Even as it began, the Franks were living  
among abominable criminality,^2 but the Ostrogoths under Theodoric were  
a restraining factor. When they were gone, and the land left unpeopled,  
and when into the vacuum the heedless Lombards rushed, learning and en- 
lightenment were ignored, until, as Mosheim says,  "nothing can equal the  
Oman, op. cit., p. 203.  
1A Note: It might be added that the excommunication of the pone  
by the Italxan and African bishops, far from indicating their non- *  
Catholicity, proves the reverse. They were so orthodox that they would  
have no communion with a pope who was in the~ilightest tainted with heter- 
k2 Greg°zy of Tours, The History of the Franks, 0. M. Dalton tram.


85  
ignorance and darkness that reigned11 in the following century .^3 it is 
no wonder then that during the sixth century the adoration of saints,  
images, and relics, already begun in the fifth century, increased un-
abashed, while 11 the cause of true religion sunk apace. . . .  ii hk  
ii century of transition. The sixth century was one of transition.  
As the century began, Italy was ruled by the wise Ostrogoths! as it closed,  
she was the unwilling host of the barbarous Lombards. As it began, Italy  
was unitedj as it closed, she was torn apart, tinder the divided rule of  
Lombards, Greeks, and popes. As it began, a dim glow of enlightenment  
still flickered in Europe! as it closed, the light was surely going out.  
As it began, the popes were under the control of the kind but dominant  
Goths) as it closed, the popes were supreme in Rome. As it began,  
Theodoric was the arbiter of Europe! as it closed, Gregory had taken his  
place.As it began, Europe was mainly Irian! as it closed, Europe was  
all but united under the Nicene Creed.  
III. CONCLUSION  
The prophecy seems to require that the 1260 days begin after the  
division of the Empire, and that the rise of Catholicism be gradual. In  
view of the events and trends of the sixth century, it seems to be as  
^3 John Laurence Mosheim, An Ecclesiastical History, p. litf.  
^ Ibid.,:pp. 102-125.  
Bury, op. ext., p. 172. Gregory mediated between Emp. Maurice  
and the Visigoths.


86  
adequate and appropriate a period as any in which to look for the begin- 
ning of the Beastf s alloted time.  
It remains now to see x^hether or not a specific date within this  
'century, namely, 538, be adequate.  
538 EXAMINED  
Is 538 generally acceptable for the starting point of the rise of  
Catholicism? The answer seems to be 51 Yes,11 for it is relatively early in  
the century of transition, and it comes after the division of the Empire,  
as has been just discussed.  
But is the specific date correct?  
The answer hinges on the apparent requirement of the prophecy*  
that by that time the Dragon should have given "its power, its seat, and  
great authority" to the papacy as the head of all Catholicism. Had this 
three-fold transaction occured by 538? More specifically, did it culminate  
in 538?  
I. THE DRAGON «3 DONATION- OF ITS  POWER MB OF GREAT AUTHORITY  
That the Roman Empire had granted great authority to the bishop of  
Rome* and had used its power to strengthen his religion, both by grant  
and default, before the year 538 is so patent as to require but little  
discussion here.  
Constantino was the first to raise universal Christianity to legal  
status. After him but as early as 380* an edict was issued stating that  
all should follow "that religion which the holy Peter delivered to the


87  
Romans,n that those who do so shall be called "catholic Christians," and  
that those who do not "shall be chastised first by divine vengeance and 
then by the punishment of our indignation, with divine approval."^  
That this law was effective in 538 is deduced  from the fact that  
Justinian republished it at the very head of the second edition of his  
Code M  
In the Edict of kb$ issued by Theodosius II and Valentinian III,  
to "disobey the precepts of the Roman Pontiff" is styled "a  crime of the  
deepest dye,11 The decree continues.  
It shall not be lawful for the bishops of Gaul, or of the  
other provinces ... to do aught without the authority of the  
venerable Pope of the Eternal City; and whatsoever the authority  
of the Apostolic See has enacted, or may hereafter enact, shall  
be the law for all.  
Thus the Dragon gave great authority indeed to the papacy of Rome. But  
that is not all. The edict has teeth in it. The power of Rome is used  
to back up the authority of the pope. When the pope summons anyone to  
trial, it says, "he shall be compelled to appearance by the governor of 
the province ... and a fine of ten pounds (of gold) is to be at once  
levied on any judge who suffers Our commands to be disobeyed.  
So, as early as hkS the Dragon had indeed given its power and  
great authority to the Beast*  
""""" '  I Z "'" *"  
Edict of Gratian, Valentinian II and Theodosius. For full text  
and documentation, see Appendix.  
^ Scott, op. cit., p.  
For full text and documentation, see Appendix.


88  
Emperor Justin in the early  sixth century gave command that every  
bishop within his realm «should satisfy the code of penance without delay  
and return to communion with the apostolic see. And this came about,11  
continues the Liber Pontiflcalis, "and there was great harmony from the  
ii9  East unto the West and the peace of the church prevailed.1^  
Justinian, in his turn, "from the beginning of his reign . . .  
promulgated the severest laws against heretics in 527 and 528.tf£°  
Manichaenas, Montanists, Arians, Bonatists, Jews, and pagans, all were  
persecuted*-^ Indeed, 11 As no preceding sovereign had been so much inter- 
ested in church affairs, so none seems to have shown so much activity  
as a persecutor both of pagans and of heretics*"^ . Justinian carried 
on this persecution on behalf of orthodoxy, of Catholicism, of the "holy  
and apostolic church of God,«53 over which the pope of Rome was *'the head  
of all the holy churches."^ Besides these legal grants of authority  
much can be said about the authority and power which accrued to the papacy  
^Liber Pontificalia, pp* 12U-131*  
Bury, op. cit., pp. U3~kk«  
^ i££i cit»  
<2  
^ James Bryce and Anonymous, nJustinian I," Encyclopedia Britannica,  
XIII, 209-213. ~~ " ""  
53 ffgancta del catholica et apostolica ecclesia.1' See Corpus^ luris  
Civilis, Beck's edition, II, 6.  
"quae caput est omnium sanctarum ecclesiarum.11 Ibid., p. 8.  
Notes UriaJa Shith, Daniel and Revelation, and other writers, have "head  
of all the churches" instead of all the "holy11 churches, following Little-
dale's translation. Scott has the translation given here, and seems to  
be more accurate, in view of Beck's edition of the Latin.


by default, that is, by the weakness of Roman emperors and try the moving  
away of the seat of empire to the last. Thus Leo shines brightly because  
of the weakness of the emperor in Ravenna, and Gregory assumes control  
because of the entire absence of the Basileus from Italy.  
As a matter of fact, as was shown on page 36, the prophecy seems  
to be concerned only with those donations which occurred after about U?6.  
But even if this means the rejection of the Edict of hhSs "that of 380 may-
be retained in view of its reissue in the Code of 534J and it, and the  
celebrated Letter of 533* and the other activities and decrees of the  
reigns of Justin and Justinian above mentioned, which occurred after 1|76,  
amply satisfy the apparent requirements of the prophecy.  
Objections. It is argued by some that the pope made no use of the  
533 letter of Justinian until centuries later, or that the Code of  
Justinian had but little influence in the ¥est till long after it was  
first issued. But there is little need to discuss these problems in this  
connection. The prophecy requires only that the dragon give its power 
and authority, and that the dragon did.  
It may be contended that the full use of the power and authority  
were not made use  of by the popes immediately after 538. That again does  
not matter. Many popes during the history of the papacy did not use all  
the advantages that were offered them. The use of the papal prerogatives  
always has depended largely on the personality of the incumbent. The pwer  
and authority were there de jure and partly de facto before 538. Ill that  
was wanting was for a man to make use of them.


90  
One other factor also must not be overlooked, namely, the conversion  
of Europe. The power of the popes grew in the sixth century  as the Catho- 
licity of Europe increased. Both started relatively small and both ex- 
panded to considerable significance.  
Conclusion. It has been shown that 538 is late enough to mark a  
time after -which the Dragon had given power and authority to the Beast  
and early enough to allow for a gradual rise before the time of Gregory.  
However, nothing has been said to prove the exact date. That remains for  
discussion in the next section*  
II. THE DRAGON'S DONATION OF ITS SEAT  
Nature of the problem. Before entering into a discussion of the  
date when the Dragon gave his  seat to the beast, let it first be repeated  
that since the prophecy paints the history of the Beast in the most sweep-
ing and comprehensive manner, ignoring intermediate ups and downs and 
emphasizing only beginning, ending, and general characteristics, so one  
who attempts to describe the fulfillment of the prophesy must be ready  
to discern only those events which apply to the prophecy and to reject  
all others. And since the prophecy is simply put, so also the fulfill- 
ment of it must be subject to simple presentation.^  
The footnotes in this chapter only begin to represent the study  
made in its preparation. But the longer the stuc^r continued, the more  
simple the outline appeared.


91  
The question* When did the Roman empire give Rome to the beast?  
Cardinal Manning contends that it was in the time of Constantine* and  
lets it go at that, saying*  
• . . from the hour when Gonstantine . . • translated the seat  
of empire to Constantinople, from that moment there never reigned  
in Rome a temporal .prince to whom the Bishops of Rome owed a per- 
manent allegience#5o  
This is all very well and is part of the picture, but the prophetic  
donation of the seat is designated as coming after the West was divided  
among the barbarians, and hence an event other than Gonstantine!s removal 
to Bayzantium must be looked for as the fulfillment  of the prophecy*  
Reason suggests 1*76, the fall of the Western emperor, but this  
cannot be since it marks also the conquest by the Arian Heruli. More- 
over, the emperor, in response to a request by Theodoric in the name of  
his restless tribesmen, "gave11 Italy* including Rome, to the Ostrogoths*  
Jordanes thus records the transaction:- Justinian^ he says* made a re- <  
quest of Zeno concerning "the western country • . • and that city which  
was the head and mistress of the world • . • Jordanes continues:  
"Send me there with my race," he said* "Thus  if you but say  
the word* you may be freed from the burden of expense here, and,  
if* by the Lord's help* I shall conquer, the fame of Your Piety  
shall be glorified there. For it is better that I* your servant  
and your son* should rule that kingdom* receiving it as a gift  
from you if I conquer* than that one whom you do not recognize  
should suppress your Senate with his tyrannical yoke and a part  
of the republic with slavery! For if I prevail* I shall retain  
^ Henry Edward Manning* The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Jesus  
Christ* p. 11®


92  
it as your grant and gift; if I am conquered* lour Piety will  
lose nothing. . . ."57  
Zeno was grieved to have him go* says Jordanes, yet he Mgranted  
what Theodoric asked* for he was unwilling to cause him sorrow*"^  
If the Empire gave Rome to the Goths in 488, it seems incontro- 
vertible that a date subsequent to lj.88 must be located as the one in- 
tended by the prophet for the  grant of the city to the Beast*  
The Gothic ¥ar» Basic to an understanding of when the Roman  
Empire gave the city of Rome^9 to Catholicism epitomized by the Papacy  
is an understanding of the Gothic war which resulted in the imperial 
restoration in Italy. A short documented account is in the appendix* but 
in brief* the story is this:  
In 535 Justinian declared a "truceless" war on the Ostrogoths.  
In that same year Belisarius conquered Sicily. In 536 he invaded the  
mainland, took Naples, and in December entered Rome without resistance. 
The Goths soon returned and surrounded the city with a great force  
, , 
Jordanes, Getica, pp. 13h-13$»  
58  
Loc» cit. Notes Gibbon, (Decline and Fall,ch. xxxix), records  
this conversation without mention of the idea of "«gIJt» giving evidence,  
however, that the conquest of Italy was done with Zeno ^"permission, and  
that, in effect, amounts to about the same thing.  
& Note: It is assumed that the Greek word thronos, translated  
"seat" and applied to the Dragon and later to Rome, can be none other  
than a symbol for the city of Rome. This interpretation is borne out by 
the designation by Papists of Rome as the Apostolic See (Seat), and also  
by the fact that the plagues which are poured out upon such material things  
as people, rivers, and lakes, are also poured upon the "seat of the beast,"  
(.Revelation 16} a usuage which suggests that the symbol is not far from  
being a literal, material location.


numbering perhaps more than  100,000, a vast host compared with the $000  
who defended the walls* A siege ensued that lasted for one year and nine  
days during which time each army indulged in sorties against the other,  
the imperial troops usually winning the smaller engagements, but the Goths - 
and this must be borne in mind — overtfhelming the Romans in the only  
pitched battle that was fought in 537* It must be remembered that in the  
only true contest  of might during 537 the Goths revealed the tfcrue nature  
of the situation, namely, that Belisarius was virtually a prisoner (even  
if a voluntary one) within the confines of the city* In 537 the Goths  
still owned Rome in the sense that they were surrounding it, that it had  
been theirs and was not yet positively taken  from them, and that no de- 
cisive battle had yet been fought*  
In 538, however, the picture changed. Their ranks thinned by  
battle and decimated by disease, the Goths in March pulled up their  
stakes and marched away to Ravenna, thus leaving Rome in the undisputed  
possession of  the empire for the first time since i*76«  
The Gothic fortresses in northern Italy gave up one by one until  
4Anf>U0 only Pavia remained in Gothic hands and Belisarius was recalled  
to Constantinople* However, Ithis was not the end of the story. In the  
absence of resistance, the Goths again took possession of almost all  
Italy, including, the city of Rome, in 5^6 for forty days, and in 5U9  
for a year or two. . But their hold on Italy was very slight and not  at  
all to be compared with their former conquest under Theodoric. Their grand  
arn^r was reduced to a few thousand, and when Narses appeared in Italy in  
551 at the head of the first real resistance, the Ostrogoths simply


94  
collapsed. The nation disappeared with the battles of Tagine in 552 and 
of Cumae in 553•  
Rome free of Arianism in 538. Of all the significant dates in the  
Gothic war, 538 seems the most interesting, because in that year the Goths  
retreated from Rome, leaving Belisarius, for the first time, in undisputed  
possession of the city. Once again it was in Catholic hands, and the 
bishop of the city, who was recognized imperially as the "Head of all the 
Holy Churches,11 was free to exercise the functions and prerogatives of 
his see (that is, Rome) without Arian interference or domination^  
Hew course of history stems from 538. The loss of life at the  
siege of Rome must have been very heavey. Proeoplous says that 30,000  
men died in one battle, and, though this figure may be exaggerated, there  
is evidence that the slaughter from arms during the whole siege was ter- 
rific. But in addition to the military casualties was the loss of life 
due to famine and pestilence. In 542 Totila himself, according to  
Proeopious, admitted that the Goths had only 1000 soldiers left as com- 
pared with 150,000 at the beginning of the war.  
Hodgkin comments : Witigis "suffered the flower of the Gothic  
nation to perish, not so much by the weapons of the Romans as by the dead-
ly dews of the  Campagna*^0 He implies here that, heavy as the military  
losses were, there were greater losses by pestilence even than by the sword.  
60 Hodgkin, op. cit., 17, 250.


95  
With ail these thoughts in mind, the next , testimony of Hodgkin is  
especially pertinents  
With heavy hearts the barbarians must have thought, as they  
turned them northwards (from the siege of Rome, in 538) upon the  
many graves of gallant men which they were leaving on that fatal 
plain. Some of them must have suspected the melancholy truth  
that they had dug one grave, deeper and wider than all, the grave  
of the Gothic monarchy in Italy. 1  
A significant event had happened, and the final death and over- 
throw of the nations was conspicuously connected with it. Hodgkin does  
not say that the Gothic monarchy was dead in 538, for it was not. It  
did not die until 552-553* But the "grave had been dug,11 that is to  
say, the end had been made sure.  
In this connection Oman says,  
The Ostrogoths . . . made a splendid fight for seventeen  
years . . . and only succumbed because the incessant fighting  
had drained off the whole manhood of the tribe. If Baduila  
could have mustered at Taginae the 100,000 men that Witiges  
had once led against  Rome, he would never have been beaten.  
low Baduila could not summon the 100,000 men because so many of  
them had been lost at Rome. Therefore, by inversion:,., Oman may be thought  
of as saying, "The Goths were defeated at the Battle of Taginae because  
they lost so many men at the siege of Rome, which ended in 538."  
As has been shown, the destruction of the Goths and the virtual  
depopulation of northern Italy paved the way for the Lombard invasion,  
and the  Lombard invasion, in its turn, by virtue of its result in the  
^ Hodgkin, op. cit., p. 25b.  
Oman, op. cit., p. 105.


96  
the isolation of Rome, gave opportunity for the signal development of the  
Papacy. % reasoning backwards the following significance of 538 may be  
seen: The Gregorian development of the papacy resulted from the Lombard  
invasion, which, in turn, resulted from the Ostrogothic defeat, which,  
in its turn, stemmed from the great loss of men in the siege of Rome that  
climaxed in the retreat of 538« v  
Objections. It may be objected tha|, in spite of this study, 538  
must be rejected anyway since no learned men ascribe to it any special  
significance *in the history of the papacy. But this is not, in itself,  
a valid objection, for every historian finds different things in history.  
For example, in discussing the French Revolution, Gershoy^ stresses  
economic factors, while Belloc^* presents military defeats and victories 
as a prime  cause of Revolutionary developments. The various philosophies  
of history, such as »great man,11 economic, geographic, anthropologic, etc.  
are well known. Each attaches importance to different events, and  passes  
over others. In view of the prominent part prophecy plays in the in-
spired Word,  would it be out of the way for a Bible student to suggest a  
"prophetic  philosophy of history," even one which might emphasize details  
that one or all of the other philosophies might overlook?  
Leo Gershoy, The French Revolution, 1789-1799«  
6U Hilaire Belloe, The French Revolution.


97  
It may be added that in connection with this very prophecy under  
discussion* Daniel says specifically* "None of the wicked shall under- 
stand; but the wise shall understand/11^ Since in understanding the  
things of God -"the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom*11^ it 
seems that it should follow that the God-fearing student will find a  
relationship between events in history and the 1260-day prophecy which 
the secular historian would overlook  
4>ome may reject 538 because after it the Goths twice again entered  
and retook Rome. But the first entrance was for but forty days and after  
the second entrance Totila immediately departed to strengthen his position  
/in southern Italy. Moreover* on both of these occasions the pope was  not  
present in Rome. So it may be said that after 538 no power hostile to 
Catholicism disputed with the papacy the control of Rome until 1798*.  
Daniel 12:10."'  
^ Proverbs 9:10.  
Again* a landmark may lie hidden by rubbish for decades. Many  
great men may visit the ; property whose boundary it marks* noting the tidy  
gardens* enjoying the owner's personality* or signing business contracts*  
but never noticing the forgotten landmark* Then aU at once the owner  
dies and the property changes hands. What happens then? Surveyors are  
called in to find the ancient landmark. But it is lost. How do they go 
about finding it? % first securing the old deed* determining from it 1  
some location of which they can be sure (it matters not from which corner  
they start)* and then measuring from there the exact distance stated in  
the deed. This procedure leads them to the brush pile. Searching in it  
they discover the landmark* — the landmark that no one else had cared  
to notice.  
In a similar manner* the student of prophecy sets out to find in  
history landmarks indicated in the prophecies. His special tools are the  
measuring line of the  year-day principle* and the surveyor's transit of  
implicit faith. Thus impelled* and thus equipped he may well discover  
details and relationships which even a careful student of secular history  
may overlook.


But for that matter, if we are to look for 1260 years of unbroken  
papal dominance of Home, the task Is hopeless, for armies hostile to the 
popes have again and again entered Rome and either locked up the Sovereign  
Pontiff or carried him off into exile. If the prophecy ignores these inci- 
dental invasions by many armies, then it may safely be said to ignore the  
brief returnsrof Totila.  
Conclusion* The removal of the capital to Constantinopel was sug- 
gested as a possible date for the giving of the seat but was rejected as  
being too early before the division among the  barbarians), and as  
being prior to the Arian invasions of Italy and the giving of Rome to  
Qdoacer. ^0n the other hand, 538 may be accepted as being the date  when  
Catholicism came into undisputed  possession of Rome, and the papacy, the  
recognized head of all that was Catholic, began then to enjoy its f*Papal  
See11 in a Rome that was free from Arian rule.  In a secondary sense also,  
538 may be accepted because the retreat of that year, caused by and.  
climaxing as it did the great loss of manpower sustained by the Goths  
during the siege of Rome, "dug the grave" of the Gothic nation, thereby  
permitting those  conditions to obtain in Italy of which Gregory was to  
make such good use fifty years later to the aggrandizement of the Papal  
See^  
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION  
It has been shown that the sixth century was one of great changes  
affecting both the papacy and Catholicism, and that the end of it saw the


99  
Beast much stronger and more independent than the beginning. It has been  
shown, furthermore, that the seventh century was too late, and the fifth  
too early, to contain the initial date of the 1260 years. Consequently,  
it seems safe to conclude that the sixth century, in a general sense, is 
adequate for the rise of the Beast.  
It has been shorn also that the Dragon gave his power and authority  
to the Beast prior to 538, and that in that very year the pope began to  
enjoy his  See free from Irian domination as a result of the Dragon's ag- 
gression. It has also been shown, incidentally, that 538 marks in a 
certain sense the beginning of the rise of the medieval papacy. There- 
fore it seems safe to conclude that the Dragon's donation of its power  
and its  seat and of great authority to the Beast in a special sense culmi- 
nated in the year 538*  
Since, therefore, 538 satisfies the apparent requirements of the  
prophecy as interpretated in the early part of this paper, and since, .also,  
it is just 1260 years prior to 1798, a date which seems to satisfy the re-
quirements for the end of the ij.2 months, it seems safe to conclude that  
the 1260 years of  prophecy may be said truly to have begun in 538.


CHAPTER VI  
SUMMARY AID CONCLUSION  
The purpose of this paper was to study the beginning. and ending  
of the 1260 years with the goal of discerning the initial and closing 
dates for the period, special attention being given to A.D. 538 and 
1798* It was felt that in doing so it was necessary to grasp the prob-
lem as a whole in order to solve it.  
An adequate interpretation essential. It has been shown that to  
attempt to trace the fulfillment of prophecy without first determining 
the requirements of the prophecy is to ensure failure.  
A study of the extant exposition of one hundred and thirty-five  
j  
commentators of the historical school revealed that, amid considerable 
confusion of views, a unity exists. The majority favored the French  
Revolution for the closing era, while those who did not may apparently 
be discounted as being prejudiced by preconceptions not required by the  
Bible.  
It has also been shown that before the French Revolution most  
men looked forward to some future event to end the 1260 days, with only  
an exceptional few looking back to say the period had closed, while  
during and after the French Revolution more than half of the nonadventist  
expositors studied looked back, the vast majority of them to the Revolution.  
Nevertheless, in spite of this significant unity and trend, the  
wide divergence of positions clustering around the 1260 days, caused as


101  
it often was by a corresponding divergence in the interpretation of the  
prophecies involved, is sufficient proof that an adequate interpretation  
of prophecy must be determined before a fulfillment can be profitably  
discussed.  
A suggested interpretation. Study has revealed that many charac- 
teristics commonly attributed to the 1260 days cannot be said to apply  
to the period in actuality, for history does not allow them, and prophecy  
does not require them. It does seem, however, that the Bible requires  
a period bounded by a gradual increase and later decrease of the influence  
of Catholicism In Europe, the same period marked specifically by a  
coinciding grant of seat, power, and authority to the Beast by the  
Dragon at the beginning, and a Deadly Wound at the close, followed by a  
wide-spread prophetic movement that would suffer a-.disappointment..  
It has been shorn that the .syBiboi"Beast" in Revelation 13 in- 
cludes the dual concept of "man of sin*" (the papacy) as well as '  
"mystery of iniquity" (Roman Catholicism^. This concept of the dual  
nature of the Beast helps to explain how temporary setbacks of individual  
popes do not interfere with the overall reckoning of the 1260 days*  
The Beast cannot be said to have received its Deadly Wound when a pope  
is put In prison, for instance, if at the same tirae his captors are  
strongly Catholic. Likewise, an early initial date cannot be suceesfully  
challenged on the grounds, for instance, that Justinian sent JKigilius  
into exile, if it can be shorn that at the same time Catholicism was 
daily increasing its influence in Europe.


102  
It has been shown that the placing by Seventh-day Adventists of  
the Deadly Wound at the close of the 1260 days and the interpretation  
of it as the captivity of the pope in 1798, is apparently unique, even  
though a study of  Revelation 13  in the light of other passages in Daniel  
and Revelation reveals that it is apparently the only logical view.  
Ellen G-. Uiite endorsed it. It has also been shown that with reference  
to the "mystery of iniquity" phase of the Beast, the Deadly Wound seems  
to foretell a conspicuous decline in the effectiveness of Catholic doc- 
trines, while with reference to the "man of sin" phase, — and, be it  
noted, in an even more clear and emphatic sense, -- it seems to foretell  
a captivity of the pope and apparent killing of the papacy as described  
in Revelation 13*10*  
1798 found adequate as an ending date* It has been shown that  
the apparent requirements of prophecy were fulfilled in such a manner 
as to indicate 1798 as the end of the 1260 years. Catholicism suffered  
a marked decline during the eighteenth century, and especially at its  
close. An international missionary movement arose towards the end of  
the same century, in which prophecy played an important part, this move- 
ment undergoing a conspicuous disappointment but not discontinuing there- 
after, but rather expanding its prophetic teaching. Coinciding with 
both of these movements came the infliction of the Deadly Wound on the  
Beast1 s visible head when the papacy was ("as it were") killed, and the  
pope was taken into captivity, in the year 1798*


103  
558 found adequate as a beginning date. It has been shown that  
the sixth century was one of great changes affecting both the papacy  
and Catholicism, and that the end of it saw the Beast much stronger and  
more Independent than the beginning. It has been shown, furthermore,  
that the seventh century was too late, and the fifth too early, to  
contain the initial date of the 1260 years. Consequently, it seems  
safe to conclude that the sixth century, in a general sense, is adequate  
for the rise of the Beast.  
It has been shown also that the Dragon gave his power and great  
authority to the Beast prior to 538, and that in that very year the pope  
began to enjoy his See (seat) free from Arian domination as a result  
of the Dragon1 s aggression. It has also been shown, incidentally, that  
538 marks in a certain sense the beginning of the rise of the medieval  
papacy, since the Gothic defeat of that year ultimately paved the way  
for papal Rome to assume a position of dominance in the West. Therefore  
it seems that the Dragon1 s donation of its power, its seat, and great 
authority to the Beast in a special sense culminated in the year 538.  
CONCLUSION  
In view of the simplicity of the prophetic outline, of the  
requirements of the prophecy, and of the apparent fulfillment that has  
been herein described, only one conclusion seems possible, namely, that  
538 and 1798 are indeed adequate dates wherewith to begin and end the  
1260 days of prophecy, and that, in fact, they are so  to the exclusion  
of all others.


BIBLIOGRAPHY


A. SOURCES  
I. SOURCES FOR HISTORY  
Ayer, Joseph Cullen, A Source Book for Ancient Church History, from the  
Apostolic Age to the Close of the Concilliar Period. New York:  
Charles Scribner's  Sons, 1933* 70? PP*  
Translations of selected sources with introductions and comments.  
Beck, D. Ioannis Ludovici Guilielmi, Corpus Iuris Civilis. Lipsiae:  
Apud Carolum Cnobloch, 1837• 2 torn.  
The Justinian Code of $3k in original Greek and Latin, with Latin  
translation of  Greek passages and an index.  
Castellio, Sebastian, Concerning Heretics, Roland H. Bainton, translator;  
Austin P. Evans, gen. ed., Records of Civilization Sources and Studies,  
no. XXII. New York: Columbia University Press, 1935^ 352pp.  
A work published anonymously during the Reformation, but attributed  
to Catellio. An attempt to couteract the Protestant leaders' tendency 
to persecute. Contains writings of contemporaries, and also of some 
early fathers.  
Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks, 0. M. Dalton, translator.  
Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1927. 2 vols. 
First volume is an introduction by the translator, with chapters on  
Gregory, manuscripts, the times, and so on. The history itself covers  
most of the sixth century, is reasonably accurate in relating Gaulish  
events, not so in regard to foregin events.  
Cassiodorus, Senator, Letters, Thomas Hodgkin, translator. London: Henry  
Frowde, 1886. 560 pp. 
A condensed translation of the Varlae Epistolae of Magnus Aurelius  
Cassiodorus Senator^ Secretary to Theodoric, king of the Goths. Intro- 
duction and index by the translator.  
Don Manuel de Godoy, Prince of the Peace, Memoirs of Don Manuel de Godoy^  
J. B. Desmenard, editor and translator. London: Richard Bentley,  
1836. 2 vols.  
The author was Spanish Prime Minister 1792-1798. The books are a  
defense of himself against critics. Evidences lack of concern over  
papal captivity in 1798.


106  
Jordanes, Gothic History, Charles Cristopher Mierow, translator. Princeton:  
Princeton University Press, 1915. 188  pp.  
The oldest extant Gothic history, written in 551, apparently with the  
purpose of helping to unite the Goths and the Romans in Italy. Based  
almost entirely on other works. Early part especially is unreliable.  
Contains an introduction and commentary by the translator.  
Paul the Deacon, History of the Langobards. William Dudley Foulke, trans- 
lator j University of Pennsylvania Reprints Ho. 8. Philadelphia, Pa.:  
The Department of History, University of Pennsylvania, 1907. 437 pp.  
An eighth century history, honest, simply written, but based, of course,  
on what information the author had available, which was not always  
accurate. Amazing fairness towards Gregory, Charlemagne, etc.  
Procopius, History of the Wars, H. B. Dewing, translator; Loeb Classical  
Library. London: William Heinemann, 1919 and 192k. VoTsT III, IV.  
The only primary source for most of the Gothic and Vandal wars.  
Accepted almost at face value by Hodgkin, Oman, and Gibbon.  
Salvian, On the Government of God, Eva M. Sanford, translator; Austin P.  
Evans, et al. editors,  Records of Civilation Sources and Studies, No.  
xxx. New York; Columbia University Press, 1930. 2io"pp. ~  
A graphic  account of the state of society, and especially the sins of  
Christians, during the first half of the fifth century,  the main  
burden being an attempt to explain why Christians were apparently  
x less favored than barbarians. Very charitable toward heretics.  
Scott, S. P., editor and translator, The Civil Law. Cincinattii The Central  
Trust Company, 1932. 17 vols. 
Translates into modern judicial language the twelve Tables, Institutes 
of Gaxus, The Rules of Ulpian, The Opinions of Paulus, The Enactments  
ox Justxnxan, and the Constitutions of Leo. Occassional uncritical 
footnotes.  
S® |22*5 21 ^Pes, (Liber Pontificalia)Louise Ropes Loomis, trans- 
lator; James T. Shotwell, et al., editors, Records of Civilization,  
§°urces and Studies, No. iii. New York: CoTSMaUniversity Press, 
1916. 169pp.  
The first English translation of this sixth or seventh-century histo- 
ry of the popes. Reliability is inversely proportionate to length of 
txme between date of writing and the popes discussed. Originally com- 
pxled from earlier lists, traditions, and imagination. Somewhat  
abbrxdged in translation. Introduction by translator.


107  
II- SOURCES FOR VIE^S OF EXPOSITORS  
These entries are unannotated since these works  
are not cited in the thesis as authorities  
Bell, George, "The Downfal [sic] of Antichrist," in the Evangelical  
Magazine (London), volume k* PF* SU-57* 98-101*, 17967"™^  
Bicheno, James, The Signs of the Times, in Three Parts, A New Edition  
with . . . an Appendix, Containing Thoughts on the FaH of the Papal  
Government: . . . tfitfa a Symbolic Vocabulary, for the Illustration 
of the Prophetic Style. London: {n.rij, , 1799*  
Bickersteth, Ecfcrard, A Practical Guide to the Prophecies. Fifth edition,  
enlarged; London: L. and G. Seeley, 18357 U32 pp.  
Burman, C. A., Academic Course, Bible Doctrines. Revised edition; General  
Conference Department of Education, 192jl*  
Cressener, Drue, A Demonstration of the First Principles of the Protestant  
Applications of the Apocalypse. London: Thomas Cockerill, 1690. 
Photostats.  
Croly, George, The Apocalypse of St. John* London: C. & j. Rivington,  
1828. ItfO. pp. Philadelphia: E. Littell, 1827. 319 pp.  
Cuninghame, William,  A Dissertation on the Seals and Trumpets of the  
Apocalypse, and the Prophetical Period of Twelve Hundred and Sixty 
Years. Third edition; London: Thomas Cadell, 1832. ^23 PP* plus  
supplement*  
Edson, Kiram, "An Appeal to the Laodicean Church,11 The Advent Review.  
Extra. Oswego, N. Y*: September, 18$). Facsimile reprint; Washington  
B. C. : Review and Herald Publishing Association, 19U6, p. 8.  
Elliott, E* B*, Horae Apocalypticae; or, a Commentary on the Apocalypse,  
Critical, and Historical* Fifth edition, four volumes, revised;  
London: Seeley, Jackson, and Halliday, 1862. Vol. III.  
Emmerson, Elson H., Bible Doctrines Study Outline* Revised; Mrwin,  
Calif*: Pacific Union College ir'ress, 230 pp.  
Faber, George Stanley, A Dissertation on the Prophecies . . . Relative  
to the Great Period of 1260 fears* London: F. C.  and'J. Rivington,  
HSdST" 2 volumes*


108  
Facsimile of the Original 1843 Chart. Reproduced by Lemos Bros., Oakland,  
California.  
Fleming, L. D., A Synopsis of the Evidences of the Second Coming of  
Christ About A. D. 15Q; in The Second Advent Library, No. xxx. 
Third edition; Boston: Joshua V. Himes, March 19* 1&42. ?6 pp.  
Fleming, Robert, Apocalyptic Key. An Extraordinary Discourse on the Rise  
and Fall of the Papacy. Reprint of the 1701 edition; New York: The  
American Protestant Society, I86I4.. 154 pp. plus appendix.  
Johnson* 0. A., Bible Doctrines. Fifth revised edition; College Place*  
Washington: Press of Walla Walla College* 1921. 324 pp.  
King, Edward, Remarks on the Signs of the Times. Reprint of a 1799 London  
copy; Philadelphia: Jas. Humphrey, 1500. If9 pp. plus supplement«  
Miller, William, Dissertations on the True Inheritance of the Saints, and  
the Twelve Hundred and Sixty Days of Daniel and John; with an Address 
to the Conference of Believers in the Advent Near. Boston: Joshua V.  
Himes, 1542.  
, Remarks on Revelation Thirteenth, Seventeenth, and Eighteenth;  
in Second Advent LibraryT^No. xlvii. Boston: Joshua ¥. Himes,  
September id, 1544•  
Newton,,Thomas, Dissertation on the Prophecies. Northampton, Mass.:  
William Butler, 1796. 591-PP#  
Questionnaires, mailed to College Bible teachers on May 1, 1951•  
The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, several issues.  
Simpson, David, A Plea for Religion and the Sacred Writings: Addressed  
to the Disciples of Thomas Paine, and Wavering Christians of Eveiy ' 
Persuasion. London: J. Mawman, 1802. Photostats of 10 pages.  
Spence* H. D. M. and Joseph S. Excel!* eds.* The PtuLpit Commentary.  
New ed.; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, [h*^ . Vol. LI.  
St. John, H. A., Our Banquet to Nourish Pure Thought Life. San Francisco,  
Cal.: Published by the Author, 1594. ^524 pp*  
Smith, Uriah, Synopsis of the Present Truth: A Brief Exposition of the  
Views of S. D. Adventists. Battle Creek, Mich.: Seventh-day Adventist  
Publishing Association, 1884• 333 PP*


109  
• . . , The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelations Revised editlonj  
Mountain View, California: Pacific Press Publishing Association,  
19i46o 830 pp."" •  
Spicer, ¥. A«, Beacon Lights of Prophecy. ^ T-akoma Park, Washington,. D. C.:  
Review and Herald Pub. Assn*, 1935* Ul5 PP*  
Tabernacle Lecture Course : Comprising a Series of Pis courses  Setting  
Forth the Doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists, Delivered at the S. D.  
^ Tabernacle, Battle Creek, Mich., and Reported for the Battle Creek  
Daily Journal. Reprinted^ Review & Herald,.26? pp. . '  
Valpy, Richard, Sermons Preached on Public Occasionsj with Notes and an  
Appendix on Various Important Subjects. Two  vols3 London: Longman,  
et al®, lBH. Photostats of.vol. I.  
Waggoner, J. H., From Eden to Eden, a Historic and Prophetic Study.  
Oakland, Calif.: Pacific Press Publishing Company,"1890 • ~1>53~PP®  
Wearner, Alonzo J., Fundamentals of Bible Doctrine. Third editionj  
Takoma Park, Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald Publishing Assn.,  
1935® 60 lessons. - - - * *  
; White, Ellen G., The Great Controversy .Between Christ and Satan. Mountain  
View, California: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1911• 718 pp.  
. , The Spirit of Prophecy. The Great Controversy Between Christ and  
Satan from the Destruction ofcJerusalem to the find of.the Controversy. 
Oakland, Calif.: Pacific PressTTHBl;. "^OE pp.  
• White, James, JIThe Third Angel1 s Message." The Present Truth, I, 9,  
April, 1850, pp. 66, 67®  
Wilcox, Milton C., Questions and Answers Gathered from the Question Corner  
Department of the Signs of the Times. Mountain View, Calif.V Pacific  
Press Publishing Association, 1911• 255 PP»  
B. SECONDARIES  
I. BOOKS, PAMPHLETS, AMD ARTICLES  
Acton, Lord, The States of the Church. Reprinted, with introductions  
Newport, R. I.: Remington Ward, 191*0* , 3b PP®  
A short survey of the Papal States written by a Catholic in i860*


110  
Alzog* John, History of the Church* F. J. Pabisch and Thomas S. Byrne*  
translators. Three volumes; New York: Benziger Brothers* 1912•  
Volume III.  
A Catholic work* bearing nihil obstat and imprimature. Scholarly*  
but thoroughly prejudiced. Translated from the ninth German edition. 
History closes with Alzog<s death in 18?8.  
Aulard* A. * Christianity aid the French Revolution* Lady Frazer* trans- 
lator. London: Bouverie House* Ernest Benn Limited* 192?. l6k PP«  
An unannotated* un-bibliographed study* whose authenticity seems  
validated  by the constant reference to documents* decrees* details  
of legislative activity* and specific events. The attempt at imparti-
ality seems quite successful.  
* The French Revolution* Bernard Mi all* trans latorf New York:  
Charles Scribner's Sons* 1910. i|. vols.  
A political history intended to narrate the vicissitudes of the prin- 
ciples of equality of rights and of national sovereignty during the  
years 1789-1804.  
Barrow* Isaac* (D. D.}* The Pope's Supremacy. New York: John C. Riker*  
181|5. 268 pp.  ™ — ———  
A detailed and: apparently well-documented study of the subject. All  
foreign-language citations are given in original as well as in the  
translation. The author is strongly Protestant and has made a close  
study of Baronius and Bellarmine.  
Belloc* Hilaire* The French Revolution. Nexf York: Henry Holt and Company*  
1911. 256 pp7~ ~ ~  
Written by  a British Catholic who favors the Revolution and makes no  
attempt to hide his points of view. His analysis emphasizes the  
military and religious factors in the Revolution. His treatment  
stops at the death of Robespierre.  
Boak* Arthur E. R.* ;  A History of Rome to 565 A« A.* Revised edition; New  
York: The Macmillan Company* 1938. xx plus it?6 pp.  
Written as an introduction to college history study. Has no footnotes  
and argues no controversial points. Charts of genealogy* index* and  
. bibliography in back.  
Bury*  J. B.* Histoiy of the Papacy in the 19th Century* (1864-1878).  
London: Macmillan and Co7* 1930. TfS pp*  
A commentary on the Syllabus of Errors* the Dogma of infallibility  
and the council which helped establish it* and other papal activities 
of the period* with their relationship to European attitudes. Edited*  
with a Memoir* by the Rev. R. H. Murray* Litt. D.


Ill  
, H. M. Gwatkin, and J. P. Whitney, The Cambridge Medieval History,  
Net* York;: The Macraillan Company, 1926. Volume II.  
Reliable, standard work. Has no footnotes but gives extensive bibli- 
ographies in the back) also maps. Has a good chapter devoted to the 
rise of the papacy.  
Church, Richard William, "Lombards," Encyclopedia Brit arnica (1939), IX,  
3U3* '  
Short article on relations of Lombards to Italy.  
Cormenin, Louis M. Be, The Public and Private History of the Popes of  
Rome, translated from the French. Philadelphia: James M. 'Campbell*  
TBIT?. 2 vols.  
Written by a Roman Catholic, but nonetheless scathing in its rebukes  
of immoral popes and relentless in its unveiling of so-called "papal  
infallibility."  
Farrow, John, Pageant of the Popes. Hew York: Sheed 0. Ward, 19ij.2.  
1*20 pp.  
Without chapter headings or table of contents, takes the reader through  
the centuries of the papacy. It covers up the worst doctrinal errors 
of the popes but mentiones with some adverse comment the irregulari- 
ties of their  private lives. A semi-popular history. Has official  
nihil obstat and imprimature.  
Froom, LeRoy Edwin,  Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers. Washington, D. C.:  
Review and Herald Publishing Association, I9i|6-1950. Four vols..  
No. LV as yet unpublished.  
An exhaustive study of the development of, and shifting trends in,  
prophetic interpretation from the time of the Jews to the middle of  
the 19th century. Is intended to show that Seventh-day Adventists 
doctrines are nothing new. Represents many years work in widely  
scattered libraries.  
, Syllabus for the Class in the Development of Prophetic Interpretation.  
Mimeographed, 1950. 2 vols. ~ ~~  
An outline study guide to the author »s Prophetic Faith series, with  
special attention in volume II to early Adventist interpretation.  
Gershoy, Leo, The French Revolution, 1789-1799» New York: Henry Holt and  
Company, 1932. Ill pp.  
Written for the express purpose of. providing outside reading for  
college students. Emphasizes the fiscal factors of the Revolution.  
Carries on until 1799* Good bibliography but no footnotes.  
Gibbon, Edward, The Decline and Fall of the Homan Empire. New York: The  
' Modern Library, {n.djl . 3 vols .  
The standard Roman history! needs no comment.


112  
Gladstone, ¥• E., The Vatican Decrees in Their Bearing on Civil Allegiance.  
New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, iQf^l U)7 pp.  
A short treatise by the man who did much to achieve civil liberties  
for the English Catholics some years before he wrote this* His at-
titude is Protestant* He feels that the civil responsibilities of  
Catholics have been greatly changed by the Decree of Infallibility  
and by the Syllabus of Errors. The work is much strengthened by his  
later Vaticanism*  
Vaticanisms An Answer to Reproofs and Replies. New York: Harper  
& Brothers, 1575 • 96 pp.  
This pamphlet, which grew out of replies to his Vatican Decrees, is  
much stronger and more detailed a history of the exceptions to Papal 
Invallibility, supremacy, etc. In the main It deals with the replies  
of Manning and Neman.  
Goyau, Georges, nFranee,fl Catholic Encyclopedia, VI, 166-190.  
Emphasizes the Catholic relationship to French history, maximizing  
the salutary effects of the Church's influence.  
Hagenbach, K. R., History of the Church in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth  
Centuries, John F* Hurst, translator. New York: Charles Scribner &  
Co., 1869• 2 vols.  
Author is an Evangelical Protestant professor of theology in the  
University of Basle. The work is a series ox lectures, formerly in  
.Gtermm*  
Hodgkin, Thomas, Italy and Her Invaders. Second Edition) Oxford; The  
Clarendon Press, 1896. Volumes III and TV in the present paper.  
Hodgkin is DCL Oxfod and Durham, Litt. D. Dublin, Fellow of University  
College, London. He follows closely to the cottrces. Interesting and  
detailed* Rather minimizes the religious motives for the Vandal and  
Ostrogoth wars.  
Jervis, ¥. H*, The Galilean Church and the Revolution* London: K. Paul,  
Trench, & Co., T8B'2. xxiii plu£T"52if. pp.  
A Catholic history) stresses the religious factors of the Revolution  
while minimizing the de-Catholicization of the masses prior to 1789*  
KIdd, B. J., The Roman Primacy to  A. D. U61. London: Society for Promoting  
Christian Knowledge, 1936* 1^9 pp- 
The author is garden of Keble College, Oxford, and styles himself one  
who sees the papal claim to supremacy the greatest hindrance to the  
('desirable) union of Anglicans with Rome. It is a small book,  but  
amply documented by a man whp has produced two books of documents  
covering this period.


113  
Leggitt, Deryl, An  Investigation of the Dark Bay of Mag 1780; Its  
Causes, Extent, and Duration. Unpublished Master's Thesis; Takoma  
Park, Washington, D. C.s Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary,  
1951.  
Reveals many dark days in New England between 1755-1798, of which,  
however!,- the one of May 19 was the most significant to contemporaries.  
Littledale, Richard Frederick, Words for Truth: Replies to Roman Cavils  
Against the Church of England. Revised and Enlarged; New York: James  
Pott & Co., 1589*" v plus 92 pp. 
A collection of articles appearing first in a magazine  and here re- 
printed.  
, The Petrine Claims, A Critical Inquiry. London: Society for  
Promoting Christian Knowledge7^l8W« 363 pp.  
With many references to sources, attempts to refute the papal Petrine.  
claims on historical evidence.  
Mann, Horace K., "Pelagius Catholic Encyclopedia, H, 602, 603.  
Short comprehensive article; does not hide the Pope's vacillation  
and mistakes in doctrine.  
Manning, Henry Edward, The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Jesus Christ.  
Second edition, London: Burns & Lambert, 1852. Iv plus 255 pp.  
A defense of the temporal power of the pope written with a prejudice  
equalled only by its author's inaccuracy.  
Mathiez, Albert, La Revolution et L'Eglise. Paris: Librairie Armand  
Colin, 1910. 307 pp.  
Emphasizes strength of Catholicism during the Revolution. Takes  
strong exception to Aulard's appraisal of Robespierre's motives.  
Maxwell, Arthur S., Great Prophecies for Our Time. Mountain View,  
California: PacifTc~Tress Publishing Association, 19h3* 315 PP«  
Popular style approach to Seventh-day Adventist interpretations of  
prophecies; intended Tor non-Adventists.  
Maxwell, C. Mervyn, A Study of the Development of the Selection of Dates  
for the 1260 Years. Unpublished paper submitted  to L. E. Froom;  
Takoma Park, Washington, D. C.: Seventh-day Adventist Theological  
Seminary, 1951* 8I4. pp.  
A survey of 750 years of exposition of  the 1260 days by men of the  
historic school; selects a dozen leading proponents,of various vies  
and appraises "their arguments; traces the development of the Seventh--'  
day Adventist position.  
Mosheim, John Laurence, An Ecclesiastical History, Ancient and Modern,  
translated by•Archibald Maclaine. New edition, six vols.; London:  
T. Cadell, et al., 1826. Volume II.


114  
A standard church history of a century agoj the notes by the trans- 
lator give corrections! Protestant in outlook*  
Munro, Dana C., "Rome: Medieval History,* Encyclopedia Brltannica (1939)*  
IX, 5L8.. 
Summary type article written in the manner  of a skilled historian.  
Newman, Albert Henry, A Manual of Church History. Revised edition!  
Philadelphia: The American Baptist Publication Society, 1911 •  
Volume IX.  
A more-or-less outline type text book for classroom and reference.  
Evangelically flavored, with a Baptist bias. Thoroughly Protestant  
but scholarly and reliable.  
Nichol, Francis D., The Midnight Cry, Takoma Park, Washington, D. C.:  
Review and Herald Publishing Association, 19hh. 560 pp. 
A defense of the  character and conduct of William Miller and the  
Millerites, who mistakenly believed that the second coming of Christ  
would take place in  the year l8li.li. Well documented.  
Oman, Charles, The Dark Ages, 476-918* Fourth edition! London: Rivingtons,  
1901. 532 pp. 
The first edition was written in 1893, and claims to be based on o- 
riginal sources and Buiy^s History of the Later Roman Empire. Mo 
footnotes or bibliography*  
Pressense, E. De, The Church aid the French Revolution, John Stroyan,  
translator. London: Hodden and S t oughton, 1069• $1$ PP*  
A history of the relationships of Church and State in France, from  
1?89 to 1802. A virile approach bordering on the sarcastic*  
Schaff, Philip, History of the Christian Church* Eighth edition, seven  
volumes! New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 191U- Volume III.  
Well-known standard history! detailed,  documented. Protestant  in  
outlook.  
Shahan, Thomas J., "Caesarius of Aries,« Catholic Encyclopedia, III,  
135-137.  
Four-column biography! presents Caesarius as a great popular preacher,  
notable Church leader,  and perfect Catholic.  
Spalding, Arthur White field, Captains of the Host. Washington, D. C.:  
Review and Herald Publishing Association, 19k9* 70k PP*  
First volume of a two-volume history of Seventh-day Adventists! covers  
the years to 1900* Thoroughly documented and detailed. Written,  
the preface says, frankly for ^believers,^ but authoritative enough  
for others.


115  
Sweet* William Warren* The Story of Religion in America. New York; Harper  
& Brothers Publishers* 1930* 1939^ §5Tpp.  
An apparently full treatment  of its subject from the first settlement  
of white men in what later became United States, An unprejudiced  
treatment of the large or old bodies* but distinctly opposed to small  
or new bodies* like Mormons and Adventists.  
Thiers* Louis Adolphe* The History of the French Revolution* 1789-1800.  
Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincotte* 1$94*vols.  
Written from standpoint o? a statesman and.politician.  
Trevor* George* Romes From'the-Fall of the Western Empire. London: The  
Religious Tract Society* [p.cfj" * pp.  
A prejudiced* anti-papal x?ork* containing influence of much personal  
opinion*  
Wallenkampf* Arnold Valentin* The Appellate Relationship of the Papacy to  
The Bishops- of the Empire from "340 to 575 A.D. Washington* D.  C.:  
Unpublished master's thesis presented to the Seventh-day Adventist  
Theological Seminary* 1944* 72pp.  
A study of the Council of Sardica* of Leo and Hilary* of Justinian's  
edict of 533* and of other phases in the establishment of papal pre-
rogatives*  
White* Ellen G.* Testimonies for the Church. Third edition; Mountain View*  
California: Pacific Press Publishing Association* 1946. Nine volumes  
found in four.  
The first part of volume 1 contains a biographical sketch of the  
author* o  finterest in this paper because she was a member of the  
Millerite movement.  
Wiriath* Paul* "France: History*11 Encyclopedia Britannica* IX* 6ll ff«  
Typical Britannica  approach.  
Wylie* J. A.* The History of Protestantism. 3 vols.; London: Cassell  
Fetter &  Galpin* B.d. . Vol. III.  
A well-written and readable history* warmly Protestant; not suf- 
ficiently "critical11 to be of the highest authority.  
_ * The Papacy; Its History* Dogmas* Genius,', and Prospects. Edinburgh:  
Johnstone and Hunter* 1551 • 558 pp.  
A thoroughly Protestant work* whose readibility and objectivity some- 
what compensate for the author's lack of skill as a trained historian.  
It is the first prize essay on popery of the Evangelical Alliance.


II. REFERENCE WORKS  

116  
Encyclopaedia Britanniea. llfth edition; Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britan- 
niea, inc., 1939 • 2li vols.  
Encyclopedia Americana, 30 vols.; 191*2 edition; New York: Americana  
Corporation, 191*2.  
Herbermann, Charles G., et al., editors. The Catholic Encyclopedia.  
New York: Robert Apple ton Company, 1907. vols, plus supplement.  
Llddell, Henry George and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, Stuart  
Henry Jones and Robert McKenzie, revisers. Oxford: The Clarendon  
Press, {n.d^ . 2 vols.  
Young, Robert, Analytical Concordance to  the Bible. Twentieth American  
edition;' New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, fn.d] . 1090 pp. plus 
lexicons and supplements. ""


APPENDICES


APPENDIX I  
A BRIEF SURVEY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EARLY  
SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST POSITION


A BRIEF StJEVEY  
OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EARLY  
SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST POSITION  
THE MILIERITBS  
William Miller1 believed that the 1260.years extended from 538  
to 1798. He noted that the pope should have power, seat, and authority  
given to him before the 1260 days  could begin, and said that all this  
had been accomplished under Justinian by 538, for he gave power in the  
enactments of the Code, authority in the decree of 533, and a seat,  
Rome, when the Ostrogoths were plucked up. Unfortunately, however, he  
mars this splendid summary by a serious error. He presents the events  
as though they all occurred in 538. He says:  
Thus the Emperor Justinian did give the Pope of Rome power over  
all the Christian churches, eastern and western, and gave him "his  
seat," the city of Rome in the west; he also gave him great or  
supreme authority in his pandect or code of laws. This was in the  
year A.D. 538; from which the Pope exercised his supreme power over  
the saints and kings of the earth, until A.D. 1798 — during 1260  
years of Papal supremacy.2  
He even goes further. He declares that as of 538 all the ten  
kings "became  of one mind, gave up their power to the bishop of Rome,  
1 On this section see LeRoy Edwin Froom, Syllabus in Prophetic  
Interpretation, vol. II.  
2 William Miller, Dissertations on the True Inheritance  of the  
Saints, p. 36; and Remarks on Revelation Thirteenth, p. 6.


120  
and the power of the papacy began."3 More than that, in 538 there began  
4  
a war of extermination against the saints.  
If Miller assigned all these events to the one year 538 (as he  
did), his arguments must indeed have been convincing. Since, however, 
the nations of Europe did not all become Catholic until at least sixty  
years after 538, the argument must be considered as more convincing  
than accurate. Miller also held to the Deadly Wound before the period  
began, though distinguishing it from the captivity and killing of  5  
"Revelation 13:10, which, he said, came at the end.  
In spite of his innaccurate initial chronology, Miller must be  
given due credit for his emphasis on the donation of the seat in 538,  
and for recognizing the end of the period in 1798 at a time when most  
American commentators tended to end it in 1866.  fi 7  Other Millerites, such as Charles Fitch, Josiah Litch,  
o 9  
L. D. Fleming, and Apolios Hale shared Miller1 s views generally, 
though with variations. Joseph Bates,for instance, at least by 1850  
recognized that the head of the Church decree occurred in 533.  
, 3 Miller, Dissertations, pp. 35, 46.  
4 Ibid«» 37*  
5 Miller, Remarks, pp. 7-10.  
® Froom, Syllabus, II, 17.  
7 Ibid., p. 19.  
8 P* 21 •  
9 Ibid»* P* 22*  
10 Via. infra.


The f,1843 Chart'lf may he regarded as a  fair statement of the  
Millerite position on the time prophecies, and it shows 538-1798 for  
sure, with the only, event noted for 538 being the plucking up of the  
11  Goths, all mention of Justinian* s elevation of the Pope being omitted.  
TOiy did the Millerites adopt the 538-1798 view when the more  
popular American view was 606-1866, with even 533-1793 more popular  
than 538-1798? The answer is apparent when their overall and main  
position is recalled. As in the case of other groups who stood out  
individually in favor of certain less common datings in view of a  
predilection for the 2300 days, so it was with the Millerites, who felt 
that the world would end in 1844, at the close of the 2300 days.  
Indeed, as Froom has so well summarized, The Millerites bolstered  
their 1843 date with five prophetic outlines, all thought to end in 1843.  
These were: 1) The 6000th year from creation, 2) the Seven Times of the  
Gentiles, dated from B.C. 677, 3) The Grand Jubilee of Jubilees, or  
fifty times forty-nine years from B.C. 607, 4) The 1335-year period  
dated from A.D. 508, besides, of course, 5) The 2300 days, dated from  
457 B*C.12  
Other expositors who were enamored of the 2300 days did not  
always conceive of them as marking the end of the world, and so allowed 
the 1290 and 1335 days to run on beyond them. lot so the Millerites,  
11 Facsimile of the 1843Chart. Cf. Froom, Syllabus, II, 29,  
who says the Chart dates the 1260 days from the elevation of the Roman  
bishop.  
12 Froom, Syllabus II, 29.


122  
who had the world coming to an end in 1843• With them, therefore, the  
1260, 1290, and 1335 days also had to end  on or before 1843. Since the  
1335 days quite evidently extend beyond the 1290 days, the 1290 days  
had to end at least 45 years before 1843, ~ and therefore they had to  
start, at the latest, in 508. The 1260 days could either begin or end  
conterminously with either of the other two periods. They preferred to  
make the 1260 days end with the 1290 days.  
Thus the Millerites were different from most other expositors,  
in that, T/shile emphasizing the 2300 days, they  had the 1335 days conclude  
with them; and they were all but unique in having the 1260 days end with  
the 1290 instead of begin with them.  
SEVENTH~MY ADVENTISTS  
The early Seventh-day Adventists (or, more properly, Sabbatarian  
Adventists) still held the Millerite views of the 1260 years, at least  
as far as the dates were concerned — in spite of the fact that the key  
date on which the 1260, 1290, and  1335 days were based, that is 1843,  
had to be revised to 1844; and also in spite of the fact that the  
apparent necessity for ending all time prophecy by 1843 had vanished.  
The scaffolding was gone, but the conclusions remained.  
At least one early Seventh-day Adventist followed Miller1 s  
sensational proofs for 538. He was Otis-Nichols, who, even as late as  
1852, said that "the Emperor Justinian . . . made the bishop of Rome


123  
the head of all the churches, in A.D. 538."13 But Otis Nichols also  
said that England was the king of the north.14  
Others did not follow Miller so closely. Joseph Bates, for  
example, differed with him on two essentials (as far as this problem 
goes)* He noted that the letter of Justinian was dated 533, and that 
the wounding of the seventh-head came at  the close of the period, the  
beast of Revelation 13 being papal and not pagan Rome. The Deadly Wound  
15  he says occurred in 1798.  
Hiram Edson, however, was not so sure about the Deadly Wound in  
1798. He preferred a little leeway, say "somewhere between 1798 and 
1809," and then describes in detail a captivity of the Pope under  
General Moillis in February to May, 1809.  
But that was not until 1856. Going back to 1850, again, James  
White has the years 538-1798, and points out that in 538 the council of  
X 7  Orleans prohibited country labor on Sunday.Xf  
Uriah Smith shared his views on Daniel and Revelation through  
the Review and Herald, and right from the start he presented his now- 
familiar view that the decree of 533 could not be carried into effect 
until the Goths were plucked up. Here are his words:  
13 Review and Herald, March 2, 1852, p. 99.  
14 Ibid., January 2, 1853, p. If2.  
15 Ibid*> August 5, 1851, p. 3, 4.  
16 Ibid«* January 24, 1856, p. 130.  
17Present Truth, vol. 1, No. 9, April 1850, pp. 66, 67.


124  
• • . before the decree of Justinian • . . could be carried into  
effect,  by which he had constituted the Bishop of Rome head of all  
the churches, the Ostrogoths must be plucked up.18  
This was accomplished, he says, when the Goths retired from Rome  
in 538, 11 and thus the third horn was plucked up before the Papacy, and  
for the express purpose too of establishing that power."19  
In defense of these positions he quotes Gibbon and Croly.  
It Is necessary to point out that at the head of this article  
Smith notes that he has followed "the excellent arrangement of George 
Storrs, in his work published in 1843." Thus he is adopting almost  
bodily into the Sabbath-Adventist body the views of the pre-disappoint- 
ment Millerite Adventists. Evidently there is a close tie between  
20  Seventh-day Adventist views on the 1260 days and those of the Millerites.  
18 Revlew and Herald, vol. 6, No. 14, November 14, 1854, pp. 108-10.  
20 If time and opportunity permitted, a continuation of this  
study would reveal that the simple 538-1798 dating was  adopted  generally  
by Seventh-day Adventist writers and speakers, that it was approved by  
Ellen G. White in the 1884 edition of Great Controversy (as Volume IV  
of Spirit of Prophecy) and in subsequent editions, that it was the view  
taught in Bible doctrines text books following their introduction by  
0. A. Johnson in 1910, and that the sliding-scale dating of 533-38 to 
1793-98 was apparently first promulgated among Seventh-day Adventists  
(according to a letter from L. L. Caviness dated April 30, 1951) by  
W. ¥# Prescott in the latter part of the second decade of this century.


APPENDIX II  
A REPORT ON QUESTIONNAIRES  
RETURNED FROM SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST  
COLLEGE BIBLE TEACHERS


REPORT ON A QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY  OF  
SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST OOLUSCBE BIBLE TEACHERS  
By means of a questionnaire, of letters, and of personal con- 
tacts, about forty Seventh-day Adventist college  teachers were contacted,  
all but one or two of them being Bible teachers. As a result, the  
opinions were secured from twenty-three Bible teachers and one history  
teacher in America, Canada, England, and South Africa.  
A copy of the questionnaire is attached. Without  attempting to  
quote precisely or to give all the answers, the responses to the  
questions were as followsi  
Eight favored Uriah Smith1 s 538-1798 interpretation and explana- 
tion as being close enough, though two of these leaned also to 533-38 
to 1793-98.  
Sixteen favored "a Gliding-scale1 interpretation  such as  
Spicer's, which uses 533-538 to 1793-1798," though of these, four also  
liked "an indefinite timing,11 such as "6th century to 18th century."  
No Bible teacher accepted "a straight 533-1793 timing," though  
the one history teacher did accept it and could allow of no other.  
Evidently the sliding scale is the most popular among SBA-college  
Bible teachers at the present time.  
In defense of the use of 533 one said, "the only significant  
event is the Decree," while  another said 533  is "better than* 538.  
Others however followed the reasoning that 538 made 533 effective. One  
(following Spicer?) said  Vigilius in 538 started a new line of popes,


127  
and another (also following Spicer?) cited the significance of 538 in  
the light of Hodgkin1 s "dug the grave11 statement.  
Question four was answered in  many interesting ways, and so  
before the answers are given, here is the question:  
4. As you look over  the whole 1260 years of prophecy, what  
special condition, authority, or qualification do you believe to be 
specified for fulfillment during the 1260 years, and which should  
not exist before or after the period begins and ends?  
The answers ranged all the way from*  
Organized persistent persecution, indisputable supremacy of  
papal see, politically, religiously, and otherwise,tf  
to:  
"Nothing specially during this period that it didn't do before  
or after.11  
In between these extremes one suggested "the Times, Laws, and  
Saints in his hands,11 another, "determination to dominate coupled with  
the opportunity to do  so,1* while another, in a similar vein, said,  
"dominance over men1 s minds with civil power to back it up." Two men,  
in their combined views, approached the same opinion as is expressed in  
this thesis: "substitution of counterfeit worship under the Pope as the  
visible head,11 with a "gradual  rise and fall.11  
Great variety also was elicited by the next question, "Define  
Papal Supremacy." Definitions included "Papacy supreme in religion,"  
"Papacy a dominant force in Europe," "The effort of the bishops to rule  
ail Christians," and "The complete and absolute subjection of all po- 
litical, religious, and other powers to the Popes." One was very


128  
cautious, saying there was no real supremacy, and so he preferred the  
word "authority.11 Others followed Uriah Smiths "ability to dominate  
over men* s minds.11  
The. Deadly Wound was shown in the paper to be the key to the  
interpretation of the 1260 days, with the 1798 captivity of the pope  
apparently the Denomination's opinion, endorsed by Ellen G. White*  
Most answers did favor the 1798 captivity. But the comments and varia-
tions are valuable. One pointed out three wounds. The Reformation, the  
Captivity of 1798 and the imprisonment of 1870. Mother denied the  
literal act, saying that the Wound was inflicted by the Word of God in  
the Reformation. Others, favoring 1798 and the period preceding, spoke  
of "Papal prestige hurt," "denial of supremacy and destruction of tem- 
porary downfall,11 and "destruction of authority and loss of the support  
of the states.11 One said "the removal with intent to prevent replace- 
ment."  
With the exception of one man, a former seminary student who had  
written a chapter on the Decree of 533, no Bible teacher claimed to  
have written any paper on the period, and one admitted he had got almost  
all he knew from his teachers. However, a  few did manifest considerable  
acquaintance with the problem. Six based their conclusions and opinions  
on G'r6at Controversy, and two followed Daniel and Revelation.  
The history teacher consulted, however, follows neither. He does  
not feel that this conflicts with his acceptance of Mrs . White as a  
spiritual leader, however, for he considers the assigning of dates as


129  
being outside of her special field. He begins the 1290 days with an  
ecumenical (?) council in 503 that decreed the Pope Yicar of Jesus  
Christ, and the 1260  days with a decree making him the head of all the  
holy churches. He closes both periods with a decree (?) or legal  
action in 1793. The commune of Paris, he says, was in 1793 virtually  
running the whole state.  
One teacher, a Canadian, took time to write a letter with a  
paragraph response to each question. His answers manifested a good deal  
of study and  acquaintance with the prophecy and its interpretation.  
Space prevents reprinting it here. However, the opinions closely  
parallel many of those expressed in this thesis. Incidentally, he holds  
to 538-1798 and feels no purpose in using the sliding scale.  
Another teacher, from Pacific Union College, made the following  
comment which seems most noteworthy:  
Personally, I have not had the opportunity to give any intensive  
study to the matter; and as  for any "conviction,ft I can only say  
that until I have had opportunity to do further study I am inclined  
to rely on the suggestions made in Great Controversy.  
I concur with those who are of the opinion that the date 1798  
marks the climax of a trend of development. What took place in  
that year was not so much significant in itself as in giving  
graphic evidence of the evil days upon which the Papacy had fallen.  
May I suggest that you secure a copy of my new Daniel and Revelation  
syllabus . . . where you will find a three-page explanation of my  
concept of the purpose of the 1260 years in regard to God1 s plan.  
For us today, it seems to me that the significance of the date 1798  
is primarily in marking the beginning of the time of the end rather  
than the close of the proceeding period. It seems to me that this  
angle of the problem is more important to Bible prophecy.  
(Emphasis supplied.)


130  
With this view this writer heartily agrees. It seems to  
harmonize with the fact that God reserved an understanding of the vision  
until the time of the end, when so many signs began to be manifest.  
In summing up, it can be said that, insofar as these question- 
naire returns reflect the view of Seventh-day Adventist college Bible  
teachers, there is essential agreement on the broad aspects of the  
interpretation of the prophecy but considerable variance in the minor  
aspects; that, in regard to the dating, the majority prefers the  
sliding scale 533-38 to 1793-98 though many favor 538-1798; and that, 
in regard to special study, only  a few claim to have taken time to make  
a close examination of the prophecy as a whole.


m>  
As you think of the problem Q£> dating the, 1260 years of prophecy, could you say  
that in your opinion you prefer  
( ) a, Uriah Smiths 538-1798 interpretation and explanation as being close  
enough.  
{ } b. A "sliding-scale" interpret&tiop,such as Spicer's, which uses 533-538  
to 1793-1798.  
( ) c. A straight 533-1793 timing. 
( ) d. An indefinite timing, such as n6th century to 18th century."  
( ) e. Other (specify) 1  
In your study of the problem, how do you  
a. Defend your choice of initial date?_^  
(  
b. Defend your choice of terminal date?  
What significance, if any, do you attach to Justinian's "Decree of 533"?  
As you look over the whole 1260~years of the prophecy, what special condition,  
authority, or qualification do you believe to be specified for fulfillment 
during the 1260 years, and which should not exist either before or after the  
period begins and ends?  
When you discuss the following terms, how do you define them?  
a. "Papal Supremacy" • .  
b. "Deadly Wound" __ ,  
c. "Plucked Up" (Dan. 7:8)^ _____ ' .  
-e you prepared any papers on this prophecy yourself, and if so, would you be wil-
Lg to share them with me? - .  
you  wish to remain anonymous in any use I might make of these opinions? .  
Signature: .  
Dncn 4-t  nvt •


APPENDIX  III  
AN INQUIRY INTO THE VALIDITY OF THE  
"SLIDING-SCALE" BATING, 533-38 TO 1793-98


AH INQUIRY INTO THE VALIDITY OF THE  
"SLIDING-SCAIS" DATING, 533-38 TO 1793-98  
The questionnaire returns indicated that a large number of  
Seventh-day Adventist college Bible teachers prefer a 533-38 to 1793-98  
"sliding-scale" dating, and specifically, one "like Spicer* s.tt Since  
this view is at variance with the one presented in the conclusions of  
this thesis, it seems appropriate, if not advisable, to launch an in- 
quiry into its validity.  
In view of the fact that Spicer is specifically mentioned, it  
might be well to review his teaching briefly. He points out that the  
111260 years of papal supremacy11 began with  
a notable decree (by the Papacy1 s chief supporter) in 533 A. D.,  
formally recognizing papal supremacy, and a decisive stroke with  
the 'sword of Rome, clearing the way, in 538.1  
He continues,  
Exactly 1260 years later we have the notable decree of the French  
government (which had been the Papacy1 s chief supporter), abolishing  
church and religion, in  1793, and a decisive stroke with the sword of  
Rome, in 1798. The parallel is complete.2  
In support of his reference to the "notable decree of the French  
government . . . in 1793,n he cites W. M. Button as saying,  
On November 26, 1793, the convention of which seventeen bishops  
and some clergy were members, decreed the abolition of all religion.3  
1 W. A. Spicer, Beacon Lights of Prophecy, p. 81 •  
2 Loc. cit.  
3 W. M. Hutton, Age of Revolution, p. 156, cited in Spicer,  
op. cit., p. 81.


133  
A little later he refers to it again as "the decree of the  
French Convention, in 1793*"4 There is, therefore, no doubt that Spicer  
is saying that on November 26, 1793, the French National Convention  
issued a decree abolishing religion.  
With this review in mind, let us turn to an examination of the  
sliding-scale position, from the standpoints of prophecy, history, and  
logic.  
From a standpoint of prophecy, Is it necessary?  The climax and  
glory of the sliding-scale view is the establishment of a parallel  
between the beginning and ending events of the 1260-year period. Care  
is taken in wording the accounts in order to achieve this desired result.  
But, the question may be asked, is it necessary to do so? Does the  
Bible foretell that the period should begin as it ends, or end as it  
begins?  
It has been showx in this paper that the Bible does not. To  
mark the beginning of the period Revelation predicts the donation of  
power, seat, and authority by the Dragon to the Beast, and to mark the  
end, the infliction  upon the Beast of a Deadly Wound by an unnamed hand.  
These events clearly are not parallel.  
Since, then, the Bible specifies non-parallel events for the  
beginning and ending of the 1260 years, then the presentation of a  
sliding-scale dating to accommodate a vaunted parallel is, from the  
standpoint of prophecy, apparently unnecessary.  
4 Spicer, op. cit., p. 81.


134  
But that is not all. Do not the proponents of this view, in  
addition to finding in prophecy what is not there, also fail to find  
in it what is there? To mark 538 they teach a flsword-stroke that clears  
the way," and are silent on the donation of the seat to the pope, —  
while, on the contrary, the Bible foretells a (post-476) donation of the  
seat to the Beast, and is silent on a "sword-stroke11 at the commencement 
of the period.  
We may add, therefore, from the sliding-scale view is, from the  
standpoint of prophecy, not only unnecessary but also inadequate.  
From a standpoint of history, is it accurate? The keystone of  
the sliding-scale view is the "Decree of the National Convention" of  
1793, a decree that "abolished all religion in France." This decree,  
they say, parallels the decree of Justinian in 533. The quotations  
cited above indicate that for this French decree they set the specific  
date, November 26, 1793.  
But was there ever such a decree of the French Convention? The  
answer is that neither on November 26 nor on any other date in 1793  
was such a decree to abolish religion issued by the National Convention1.5  
There was, it is true, a decree of this sort (and date) issued  
by the commune of Paris, but it was limited to its own jurisdiction.  
Similar sentiments, furthermore, were voiced in many places in Prance. 
But the National Convention did not issue such a decree in 1793.  
5 see A. Aulard, The French Revolution, III, 17, 159, 160$  
W. H. Jervis, The Gallican Church and tiie Revolution, p. 25; Louis  
Adolphe Thiers,History of the French Revolution, I, xxv, III, 239.


135  
It Is true that on August 5 the Convention did vote a change of  
the calendar, effective as of September 22, for the avowed purpose of  
abolishing the symbols that reminded the people of their old super- 
stitions, but the decree changing the calendar did not "abolish all  
religion,11 and it was not issued on November 26.  
Quite contrary to the ordinance of the commune, as a matter of  
fact, was the manifesto issued by the National Convention on December 5  
in intentional reaction to the commune* s decision. It declared to all  
Europe,  
Your masters tell you that the French nation has proscribed all  
religions! that it has substituted the worship of a few men for  
that of Divinity. They lieV The French people and its representa- 
tives respect the liberty of all worships, and proscribe none of  
them; they abhor intolerance and persecution, with whatever pre-
texts they cover themselves.1^  
It may be objected with some validity that this manifesto was a  
political move and not wholly either  sincere or according to fact. But  
the sincerity or truthfulness of the matter is of no concern here. The  
thing we are looking for is a decree, a.written statement.  
It is argued by some that the Paris commune at this time was  
virtually running Prance, and hence its decree may be accepted as the  
will of the nation. But is this so? On the very November 26 when the  
commune was passing its law, Danton in the Convention was denouncing  
the anti-religious masquerades, and declaring, "If we have not honoured  
6 E. De Pressensd, The Church and the French Revolution,  
pp. 298 ff.  
7 Ibid., pp. 318, 319.


136  
the priest of error and fanaticism, neither will we honour the priest  
of infidelity.H® In its activities of November 26, says Pressense, the 
commune reached the climax of its increasing power. Its audacity pro- 
voked the  wrath and recantation of the Convention, and a virtual Decla- 
ration of War was sounded by Robespierre.9 Whatever position of leader-
ship the commune may or may not have seemed to have occupied on  
November 26, it soon became evident which body was the leader in fact.  
The furthest the Convention went in sympathy with the commune  
was in specifying, in a decree of December 8, that it did not intend  
the abrogate the resolutions taken by the representatives of the people  
(to destroy superstition)j but at the same time  it forbade all violence  
or threatenings contrary to the liberty of worship.^  
That the Paris commune in particular, and many of the French  
people in general, rejected religion in 1793, cannot be denied; but to  
say that on November 26, 1793, the National Convention passed a decree 
abolishing religion in France is, in point of history, apparently  
incorrect, and inaccurate.  
From a standpoint of logic, is it reasonable? The men "who favor  
the sliding-scale view speak of a period of 1260 days extending between  
533-38 and 1793-98. A little chart will assist in the discussion of  
this phase of the problem, and in answering the question, Are there  
8 Ibid., p. 318.  
9 Ibid., pp. 313-317.  
10 Ibid., p. 320.


137  
1260 years between 533-38 and 1793-98? Let us draw first a line 
bounded by specific events represented by (f) and extending  from 538  
to 1798, and representing exactly 1260 years. Below it, let us draw  
another line from 533 to 1798. At the left end of it let us draw  
a "five-year" circle to include the events of 533-38, the era that is  
said to begin the periodj and at the right end, let us draw another  
"five-year11 circle to include the events of the closing era. Then let  
us measure the distance between the circle 533-38 and the circle 1793-98•  
538-1798  

1793 1798  
1  
i  
533-38 to 1793-98  D  I  1260 years | ^  
1255 years ^ 5  • - 1  
l  
It is quite apparent from the chart that the length of time  
elapsing between 533-38 and 1793-98 is not 1260 years at all, but 12551  
Hence to speak of "1260 years between 533-38 and 1793-98" in, in fact,  
a contradiction of terms varying only in degree from such a statement  
as, "The seventy-five years between 1945 and 1950," and so is, in point  
of logic, apparently unreasonable.  
But it is ofttimes contended that while the period may be spoken  
of as beginning and ending thus, actually it did not begin until 538  
nor end  till 1798, and that the sliding-scale dating is not intended to  
say that it  did. Then, would it be out of place to ask, if the period


138  
did not actually begin until 538, then wby say that it began in 533-38?  
And if if did not actually end until 1798, then why say that it ended  
in 1793-98? Does not this only tend to confuse the issue?  
Conclusion. It has been shorn that, from the standpoint of  
history, the sliding-scale view is apparently inaccurate, while from  
the standpoint of logic, it is apparently unreasonable. Since it has 
also been shown that from the standpoint of prophecy it is apparently  
both inadequate and unnecessary, it is the conclusion of this student  
that the sliding-scale dating should be laid aside in favor of the more  
simple dating,  538-1798.


APPENDIX I?  
EDICTS ESTABLISHING PAPAL AUTHORITY


THE EDICT  
OP GRATIAN, VALENTIMIAN II AND THEODOSIUS  
FEBRUARY 27, 380  
It is our will that all the people subject to the government of  
our clemency shall follow that religion which the holy Peter delivered  
to the Romans, as pious tradition from him to the present times declares  
it, and as the pontiff Damasus manifestly observes it, as also does  
Peter, bishop of Alexandria, a man of apostolic sanctity; that is, that  
in accordance with the apostolic teaching and gospel doctrine, we should  
believe in the deity of the Father and the Son and the Holy  Spirit, of  
equal majesty, in sacred Trinity. Those who follow this law we order  
shall be included under the name of catholic Christians. All others we  
pronounce mad and insane and require that they bear the ignominy of 
teachers of heresy; their conventicles shall  not receive the title of  
churches; they shall be chastised first by divine vengeance and then by  
the punishment of our indignation, with divine approval.  
Codex Theodosianus, XVI, 1, 2. Text. C. Mirbt, Queilen zur  
Geschlchte des Papsttums, 4th ed., 134. Quoted in Shotwell and Loomis, 
op. cit., p. 675.


THE EDICT  
OF THEODOSIffS II AND YALENTINIM III  
A. D* 445  
It is certain that the one and only safeguard of Us and Our  
Empire is in the favour of God Most High, towards meriting which  
Christian faith and our venerable religion mainly conduce. Whereas,  
therefore, the authority of a sacred Synod1 hath confirmed the Primacy  
of the Apostolic See, the merit of St. Peter, who is the Prince of the  
Episcopal Choir  (coronae), and the dignity of the City of Rome, so that  
no presumption should attempt to do aught unpermitted by the authority  
of that See; then only will the peace of the Churches be preserved, if  
the whole world (universitas) acknowledge its ruler. And vfhereas this  
rule has  been hitherto inviolably observed, Hilary of Aries (as We  
learn from the faithful narrative of the venerable Leo. Pope of Rome)  
hath with contumacious daring presumed to attempt certain unlawful acts, 
and consequently an obominable disturbance has invaded the Transalpine  
Churches, as a recent example proves. For Hilary, who is styled Bishop  
of Aries, without consulting the Pontiff of the Roman Church, but from  
his own rashness alone, has usurped and seized upon the ordinations of 
bishops which in no way belong to him; for he removes some illegally,  
and has ordained others Irregularly, against the wishes and remonstrances  
of the citizens* And as these bishops were  not readily received by  
those "who had not elected them, he collected an armed band, and in 
hostile fashion either laid siege to or breached by  storm the defences  
of the walls, and installed by process of war into his see the man whose 
duty it would be to preach peace.^  
When these offences against the Imperial Majesty, and against  
the reverence due to the Apostolic See, had been investigated by order  
of the holy Pope of the City, a certain sentence was passed on him  
^Hilar^/ by reason of those iwhom he had unduly ordained. And that  
sentence would have been valid throughout  Gaul, even without the Im- 
perial sanction.^ For what could fail to be lawful power over the  
Churches, if supported by the authority of so great a Pontiff ? However,  
this motive has called Our attention also to the matter, lest it should 
be assumed possible for Hilary (whom nothing but the kindness of the  
amiable Pontiff suffers to bear still the name of bishop), or for any  
other person, to mix warfare up with Church questions,  or to disobey  
the precepts of the Roman Pontiff* For by such outrages the Faith and 
the honour of Our Empire are violated. Nor do We urge this ground  
alone, which Is a crime of the deepest dye, but, in order that not even  
the slightest disturbance may arise amongst the Churches, or religious  
discipline be in any respect relaxed, We decree by this perpetual  edict  
that it shall not be lawful for the bishops of Gaul, or of the other


142  
provinces, contrary to ancient custom, to do aught without the authority  
of the venerable Pope of the Eternal City: and whatsoever the authority 
of the Apostolic See has enacted, or may hereafter enact, shall be the  
law for all* So that if any bishop, summoned to trial before the Pope  
of Pome* shall neglect to attend, he shall be compelled to appearance  
by the governor of the province, in all respects regard being had to  
what privileges Our deified parents conferred on the Roman Church*  
Wherefore your Illustrious and Eminent Magnificence is to cause what is  
enacted above to be observed in virtue of this present edict and law, 
and a fine of ten pounds /of gold/ is to be at once levied on any judge  
who suffers Our commands  to be disobeyed.  
* There is a careful absence of any specification. In fact, no  
such synod had ever existed so far, and Leo knew it.  
2 A second falsehood. No such acts were committed.  
3 A third falsehood, for the Bishops of Gaul declared the Pope' s  
sentence canonically void.  
Littledale, R* P., The Petrine Claims, pp. 227, 228. Text in  
Codex Theodosianus, tfNov. Valentin.11 Ill, tit. XVI, ed. Eaenel, cols.,  
172-176.


LETTER  
OF THE EMPEROR JUSTINIAN  
VICTORIOUS, PIOUS, HAPPY, RENOWNED, TRIUMPHANT, MMAYS AUGUSTUS  
TO JOHN  
PATRIARCH,, AID MOST HOLY ARCHBISHOP OF THE FAIR CITY OF ROME  
With honor to the Apostolic See, and to Your Holiness, which  is,  
and always has been remembered in Our prayers, both now and formerly,  
and honoring your happiness, as is proper in the case of one who  is  
considered as a father, We hasten to bring to the knowledge of Your  
Holiness everything relating to the condition of the Church, as We have 
always had the greatest desire to preserve the unity of your Apostolic  
See, and the condition of the Holy Churches of'God/as they exist at  
the present time, that they may remain without disturbance" or opposition.  
Therefore, We have exerted ourselves to unite all the priests of the  
East and subject them to the See of Your Holiness, and hence the  
questions which have at present arisen, although they are manifest and  
free from doubt, and, according to the doctrine of your Apostolic See,  
are constantly firmly observed and preached by all priests, We have  
still considered it necessary that they should be brought to the  
attention of Your Holiness. For we do not suffer anything which has  
reference to the state of the Church, even though what causes the  
difficulty may be clear and free from doubt, to be discussed without  
being brought to the notice of Your Holiness, because you are the head  
of all the Holy Churches, for We shall exert Ourselves* in every way  
(as has already been stated), to increase the honor and authority of  
your See.  
S. P. Scott, The Civil Law, XII, 11, 12.


APPENDIX ¥  
A HISTORY OF THE GOTHIC WAR  
535-553  
WITH PERIODIC MAPS


A SHORT HISTORY  
OF THE GOTHIC WAR  
535-553  
In the year 526 the great Theodoric, rex of the Ostrogoths, and  
virtually Emperor of the "Wast, brought to its close a wise and prosper- 
ous reignj and, as he did so, the sun of the Gothic race, which till  
now had been riding high in an almost cloudless sky, passed its zenith  
and began to trace a downward course it should not leave until, in de- 
spair and obscurity, it should set forever twenty-seven years later,^  
Theodoric was succeeded by Athalaric, his grandson. But since  
he was yet a  lad, his mother Arnalasuntha was appointed regent* The  
Goths were restless under a woman ruler, but endured it somehow. At  
last, however, when Arnalasuntha whipped the prince,, the nobles were in- 
censed and spoke their minds. She outwardly submitted but inwardly 
seethed with rage. Not  long afterwards she assigned assassins to seal  
the offensive mouths of three of them forever.  
Hardly had the murderes left the palace than fear gripped her at  
the thought that they might fail in their purpose, and the wrath of the  
nobles might fall back on her. She rushed a letter to Justinian with  
all haste, asking him if it were his pleasure that she should come to  
1 The source for  this history is Procopius, History of the Ware,  
H. B. Dewing, translator, Loeb Classical Library, hereinafter referred  
to as ^Procopius11 with volume and page number as in the Loeb edition.  
The main guide and secondary is Hodgkin, Thomas, Italy and Her Invaders,  
hereinafter referred to as *fHodgkin« with volume and page number.


146  
him, for, she said, she desired to leave Italy as soon as she could.  
The Emperor was pleased indeed and made a fine house ready for her.  
.She equipped a vessel and set aboard it a great amount of gold — but  
tarried until word should arrive about the nobles. When at last the  
third messenger had arrived, and she had found out thatx her-plans were  
thus far successful, she abandoned her thoughts of quitting Italy, and  
9 \  
returned to Ravenna to strengthen her rule.^  
It was a dark day for the Goths when Araalasuntha first aroused  
the interest of Justinian in her behalf.  
Soon ambassadors arrived with credentials from Byzantium and with  
three motives in their breasts* The first motive, the outward one, was  
to settle a minor complaint* The second, and an important one, was to  
secure from Amalasuntha a promise to surrender the Gothic realm to the  
Emperor. The third was  to secure from Theodahad, uncle of Athalaric and  
heir-presumptive should the youth perish, the promise to yield Tuscany  
in exchange for gold and a title in New Rome. In reason number one they  
failed, but.in the other two they were, amazingly enough, abundantly suc- 
cessful. The royal house of the Ostrogoths was willing to betray its 
subjects to the Emperor. The date was 53h^  
How happy must Justinian have been when he heard the good news.  
Already the Vandals were, or almost were, in his hands, and now Italy  
was to be his — without a battle* In the autumn he dispatched a  
2 procopius, III, 21*  
3 Hodgkin, III, 637-639*


147  
"rhetorician of Byzantium named Peter . . . one of the ablest diplo- 
matists In the imperial service,to receive the kingdom.  
But many and strange were the events to transpire between the  
appointment of Peter and his arrival in Ravenna. For one thing, an in- 
vestigation into the activities of Theodahad had found him guilty of e-
normous crimes and had forced him to make restitution, thus embittering  
him against imalasuntha. /  
Then, after a sickness, the boy king, Athalarlc had  died, in  
October, thus depriving Amalasuntha of her right to rule. But imalasuntha 
was detemined to go on ruling, and so — of all things ~ she proposed  
to share the throne with  Theodahad (by now her sworn enemy), trusting to  
his sense of gratitude to leave her still the virtual sovereign.  
Theodahad accepted the position, became king, and sent off a  
friendly letter to Justinian announcing the new state of,affairs. Hardly  
had the ink dried and the posts started on their way, however, than he  
committed his benefactress to a lonely island prison and shortly there- 
after permitted relatives of the murdered nobles to take her life* Says  
Procopiust  
They went to the island and killed Amalasuntha, ~ an act  
which grieved exceedingly all the Italians and the Goths as  
well. For the woman had the strictest regard for every kind  
of virtue, as has been stated by me a little earlier  
Thus had the situation greatly changed when finally Peter arrived  
in the early part of 538* "It did not  take him long to make up his mind .  
h Hodgkin, III, 639-6^0•  
5 Procopius, III, ijl#


148  
what to say to Theodahad (who by now had'decided he  would hold on to the  
kingdom after all). .Because the Goths had committed this base deed,  
there would be Mwar without truce between the emperor and themselves.11^  
Hodgkin comments: • • - 
It was a 'truceless war1 which Justinian's ambassador had  
denounced against the cringing Theodahad when he heard of the  
murder of Amalasuntha. And in truth all the sehemings and  
machinations of the Byzantine court had been rewarded beyond  
their deservi-ngs by . as fair and honourable an excuse for war  
as ever prince' could allege . . . « The great Emperor  now ap- 
peared upon the scene in his proper character as Earthly provi- 
dence* preparing to avenge* on an ungrateful and cowardly tyrant*  
the murder of the noble daughter of Theoderic*?  
The use of the term "war without truce" is highly significant*  
for it was such a war* indeed* which was to be  waged* It is also well  
to note that there is no mention made of religious differences as a  
cause for the war*  
The war begins. Soon the armies of the Empire were on the march®  
And soon* though not just yet* were to perish* in the name of vengeance  
for the death of one woman* the lives of hundreds of thousands of both  
Goths and Italians* people who* as Procopius observes* were themselves  
grieved by the deed.  
The war began that same year* 535>* Between three and four thou- 
sand troops marched under Mundus into the province of Dalraatia* defeated 
a force of Goths there* and entered Salona without further opposition.  
6 Procopius* 111* I4I4I.  
7 Hodgkin* IY* 1-2.


149  
And then, but the thought was far more ominous, news arrived that  
Belisarius, the vanquisher of the Vandals, had landed in Sicily with 
7500 under his command.  
Sicily fell almost without resistance, the people being eager  
to become again the subjects of the Emperor. But Palermo in the west  
contained a Gothic garrison, and it held out against Belisarius until  
he finally lifted his bowmen up by the boatload to the mastheads of his  
ships, thus conveying them to the tops of the walls from "which they  
gained an easy and victorious entry into the city.  
Sicily was now in the hands of the Romans3 but, though the con- 
quest was relatively easy, it had consumed seven months, and Belisarius  
was not able to turn his attention to Italy proper until the beginning  
of 536.  
There was to be yet more delay,  however.  From North Africa there  
came a report at Easter time of a daring mutiny, a situation which would, 
of course, have to be settled first -- and was, with characteristic  
dispatch  
In the meantime, however, Theodahad had performed a perfect diplo- 
matic somersault. On hearing of the invasion of Sicily he had gone into  
a panic of despair. Peter the ambassador was rushed back to Justinian  
with offers of gold, soldiers, and limitations on Gothic prerogatives in  
favor of the Emperor, if only the war might be stopped now. Hardly had 4  
8 Hodgkin, IV, 26-32|.


150  
Peter started out than he was called back and further entrusted with the 
promise of the whole kingdom*  
But before Peter returned* with a commission to secure all the  
promises in writing and then to send for Belisarius to confirm them* the  
Goths effected a very dubious victory in Dalmatia* in which the province  
was forever lost* but th© Soman general* Mundus* and also his son* were  
9  
slain* Theodahad felt much better now about the war situation* and  
when Peter returned he found once again that Theodahad had reversed his  
stand* Italy, apparently* was not going to be gained back for the Empire 
on the strength of anybody's promises*  
After Justinian heard about the battle in Dalmatia* and of  
Theodahad1 s reversal of policy* he n commanded Belisarius to enter Italy •  
with all speed and to treat the Goths as enemies*1110  
Belisarius forthwith set foot in Italy in May or June of 536* and*  
"planting his standard on the Italian soil* was daily joined by large  
numbers of the inhabitants * "1^ Those who joined him were not Italians  
only* "No less a person than Evermud* son-in-law of Theodahad * * *  
prostrated himself at the feet of Belisarius*"12 So weak was the nation- 
al feeling  among the Goths at this time I  
9 Hodgkin* IV*. 19.  
10 procopius* IV* 6£*  
H Hodgkin* IV* hi*  
IP ^ Loc* cit*.


151  
With .this expanded army, Belisarius proceeded to Naples. After  
a siege of some time he discovered that he could enter the city by way  
of an aqueduct. Knowing now that the city must soon be his, he pleaded  
with the people to surrender without a battle — not in order to save  
the lives  of his own men, but because, he said, he had observed the  
horrors that attended  the fall of other cities, and desired to spare,the  
Neapolitans.13 The citizens were counteradvised by one of their own  
number, and soon the city fell* But Belisarius, as soon as he was able,  
ran in and out among his men and caused them to desist from further 
carnage, saying that nit is a disgrace to prevail over the  enemy and  
then to show yourselves vanquished by passion.1^ This is a remarkable  
thing in a general, and is to his credit.  
The progress of the Roman general  aroused., the Gothic nobles to  
their senses, and they held a meeting in August, 536. Theodahad was de- 
posed and Witigis elected ~ a warrior who had done well in minor cam- 
paigns, but who was not destined to do as well in the weightier problems  
that/lay ahead. A loyal citizen was discharged to slay the deposed ,  
monarch, and, because he had a personal grudge against him and because  
he now had a pious reason for doing what had long been his ambition, he  
pursued Theodahad with unusual enthusiasm and soon put an end to his 
vacillating existence.^'  
13 Prbeopius, III, 89.  
Procopius, III, 103.  
& Hodgkin, I¥, 6k-6$.


152  
Witigis now found himself in a dilemma. The Franks were knock- 
ing for admittance at the north-western boundary of his realm and the  
Romans were already breaking in at the south. Against neither had ade- 
quate preparation been made. Faced with a decision as to which to fight  
first, he decided wrongly, and thereby decided the fate of the Gothic  
nation. He removed his forces into North Italy in order to settle  
matters with the Franks first, and thus left Rome and the south unde- 
fended.  
Having arrived in Ravenna, divorced his wife, and married a young  
daughter of Imalasmitha, he wrote Justinian to ask him to stop the war,  
for a daughter of itoialasuntha was now on the throne, and the vile  
Theodahad, who had murdered Amalasuntha (for which crime the war had  
been begun), had now atoned for his sins with his life. He then wrote  
the orthodox bishops asking them to pray for the success of the embassy  
which was entrusted with the letter.  
His next act was to do what he should have done sooner. He  
bought off the Franks with gold and territory. If he had done this  
sooner, and kept his forces in central and lower Italy, he might have  
defeated Belisarlus.^  
Belisarius spent the summer and fall consolidating his gains in  
Southern Italy, a process expedited by the treachery of yet another  
Gothic general. He then settled down to await a message from the Bishop  
of Rome. True to his expectations, It soon came. Pope Silverius, who  
16 Hodgkin, 17, 69-72


153  
had just "sworn a solemn oath of fealty to Witigis, now, near the end of  
536, sent messengers to Belisarius to offer the peaceful surrender of  
the city of Rome."17  
Witigis had not left the city undefended. A garrison J4.OOO strong  
was there under the command of a brave general. The Romans, on their  
part, were approaching with only 5000. If the Goths had closed the city  
gates and forced the Romans to camp outside until reinforcements should 
arrive from Ravenna, they could have caused the enemy to fight a pitched  
battle in the open, and .quite likely, they would have defeated them and  
saved Italy for themselves. But the fact is, they did not* Procopius  
supplies the curious fact that they left "with the permission of the  
Romans.<phe brave old general tried to make them stay, but they  
would not obey. And Procopius writes:  
And so it happened on that day that at the very same time  
when Balisarius and the emperor's army were entering Rome  
through the gate which they call the Asinarian Gate, the' Goths  
were withdrawing from the city through another gate which  
bears the name Flaminianj and Rome became subject to the 
Romans again after the space of sixty years, on the ninth day  
of the last month, which is called "December" by the Romans,  
in the eleventh year of the reign of the Emperor Justinian.19  
Belisarius immediately set about repairing the walls and pre- 
paring a moat and fosse — a procedure which caused a good deal of alarm  
among the citizenry, who were horrified at the thought of a siege. The  
17 Ibid*, p. 82•  
procopius, III, lU5*  
^ PP* 1U5-3JU6.


154  
wise general brought In large supplies of food from Sicily, and had the  
citizens help him, though they did so, ^sorely grumbling*"20 He then 
invested some of.the chief cities of the neighborhood. And  thus, as  
Procopius remarks:  
In this way Belisarius won over the whole of that part of  
Italy which is south of the Ionian Gulf, as far as Rome and 
Samnium, and the territory north of the gulf, as far as 
Liburnia. * • .21  
and, it might be added, he did it almost without a battle*  
The imaginations of the Romans having been excited at the thought  
of a siege, 'dissatisfaction against Belisarius began to be expressed  by  
many* Some very exaggerated reports reached "Sitigis, who now was pos- 
sessed of a new fear. He concluded that in less time than it takes to  
tell, Belisarius would be forced out of Rome, and he now became con- 
cerned for fear that he would be driven out  of all Italy before  he could  
meet him in battle and have the personal pleasure of destroying him.  
And so it came about that ¥itigis, who had dallied for three months,  
suddenly became obsessed with one ambition, to  get to Rome just as soon  
as he possibly could.  
Soon the sentries on the walls of Rome described a multitude like  
the sands of the sea marching over the hills to the north* On and on  
they came, 1^0,000 strong, and most of them, as well as their horses,  
99  clad in armor."  
20niodgkin, IV, 8?. 
21 Procopius, III, 153.  
22 Procopius, III, 161* Gibbon accepts this figure (Gibbon,  
Decline and Fall, II, 5'65), but Oman cuts It  arbitrarily to 100,000  
(Oman,"op, cit., p. 83.).


155  
After an initial accidental encounter in which Belisarius almost  
lost his life, the Goths built large ox-drawn-machines with which to  
assault the walls, and then at the sound of a trumpet in the early morn- 
ing, moved in on the Eternal City, like a great monster attacking a 
helpless child, What could ^000 do against 150,000? The Romans were in  
dismay, but Belisarius looked on with a sneer. They could not bear to 
see him trifling in the extremity of their danger, and heaped abuse upon  
his incompetence. But he still waited as the enemy came on — and still  
smiled.^  
Then suddenly, when the enemy was in close range, he gave the  
order to shoot. 'Within a moment the oxen were dead and the great towers  
and battering rams stood motionless.. Witigls ordered his men to harass  
the defenders there while he attempted assaults on other parts of the  
wall. A number of attempts were made and bitter fighting ensued — but  
when the day was done, the Goths were still outside.  
The loss of life in this one battle was tremendous, if Procopious  
is to be trusted. He says that not.only did the Romans assert, but the  
Goths themselves admitted, that after this one day of fighting 30,000 of  
the barbarians lay stretched dead upon the field, beside the vast number  
of the wounded.^4  
Realizing  now that a long fight lay ahead, the Goths fortified  
their camps for a siege. Then, in order to insure hardship within the  
23 Hodgkin, IV, 166-181.  
Ibid., p. 181.


156  
city, they did an amazing thing. They broke all fourteen of the aque- 
ducts which brought water into Rome* But this harsh and cruel measure  
in the end helped wreak their own defeat — for the great torrents of  
water spilling  over the broken edges of the aqueducts, formed great  
marshes on the ground* wherein were bred mosquitoes which in turn 
brought pestilence into the Gothic camps.  
Ifhen the citizens found themselves deprived of their baths, and  
witnessed the destruction to their lands going on outside the wall, they  
railed openly against Belisarius. Witigis* on hearing this, took heart,  
and sent envoys* but the general replied that, since it was not common  
for men in his position to take advice from their enemies* he would keep 
his own counsel. 25  
It is not necessary to recount all the events which transpired  
during the year and nine days that elapsed during this memorable siege.  
However, since it began during the year 537 and ended in 538, the date  
around which this paper is written, it is necessary to discover the main 
events* and particularly the reasons for which the Goths finally retreated.  
On the forty-first day of the siege* 1600 cavalry arrived* and  
Belisarius considered it time to take the offensive. He began to send  
out sorties of'200 or more men to engage the enemy if possible* kill as  
many of them as they had arrows for* and then to return. They met with  
repeated success and slew great numbers. But as a result they became  
cocksure and demanded that Belisarius lead them out to a pitched  battle  
~ Procepius, in* 195*


157  
and settle the whole war then and there. Although he knew it to be un- 
wise, he finally agreed — with results% Though the Imperial troops  
fought better than the Goths, they were so few against so many that by  
sheer weight of members the Goths were bound to win.  
This battle was fought in 537* It was a conditional victory for  
the Goths.  
Belisarius now went back  to the plan of small sallies. In all,  
sixty-nine such encounters took place. Procopius pictures them as: all  
successful for the Romans, but Hodgkin2^ suggests that probably some  
were also for the Goths — though the balance was in favor  of the Romans.  
But now two other enemies began to stalk among the two camps, and  
the all-important question was, to which, side would they lend the more  
effectual aid? "The names of these two invisible champions were Limes 
and Loirnos (Famine and Pestilence)."2?  
Famine in Rome prompted the citizens to request Belisarius to let  
them stage another pitched battle, but he refused. Procopius and  Antonina,  
Belisarius1 wife, were dispatched to secure reinforcements and food, and  
in due course both arrived in good quantity., IDecember 5600 fresh 
troops arrived, so that soon thereafter Belisarius so increased his of- 
fensive that he even attacked the Gothic camps. Deep discouragement to 
the barbarians resulted, for they now felt they were just as much the  
besieged as the besiegers. Moreover, they were suffering unbelievably  
26 Hodgkin, TV, 203.  
27 P* 210.


158  
from famine and pestilence —- and who knew how soon more reinforcements  
would arrive inside the city walls?  
They sent an embassage to Belisarius, asking him to stop the war,  
as it was unfair to  begin with, and causing more distress in Italy every  
day* The general laughed. Bub an agreement was reached on a three- 
month truce, during which time representatives were to be sent to  
Justinian, to talk over the matter in his presence.  
No.formal truce was signed, or rules for it agreed upon. The  
trusting Goths relaxed their blockade, while Belisarius took advantage 
of them to replenish the larder of the great city. As time passed, the  
Goths recalled some of their garrisons from nearby cities for one reason 
or another, and Belisarius immediately'sent his soldiers in (peacefully)  
to fill the vacuum. When the Goths returned to their posts, the Romans  
remained immovable. The Goths retaliated with three childish attempts  
upon the city. Then Belisarius, deciding grandly that things had gone  
far enough, took matters into his own hands and ordered one  of his  
generals, John by name, to burn and pillage the towns In the rear of the  
enemy — an easy assignment, since most, of the menfolk had gone up to  
the camp around the city  leaving their women and children defenceless.  
John then performed a master stroke  -- he tookeRimini, a city 200 mile's  
to the rear of the Gothic army, but only thirty-three miles, or a single  
day's march, from Ravenna.  John "rightly calculated that this step of  
his would lead to the raising of the siege of Rome."2®  
28 Ibid., pp.  236 f.


159  
When the trembling messenger arrived at the tent of Ifitigis with  
the fearful news that Rimini had fallen, the Goths knew that they could  
stay no longer where they were. They.set their tents afire and sounded  
the call to retreat* But even in doing' so, many of them lost their  
lives in a last charge from the gates of Rome.  
So it came to pass that when the three months of truce had  
expired, although no tidings had been received from the am-
bassadors, the Goths resolved to abandon the blockade of Rome* y  
three hundred and seventy-four days after it had begun*  
The time is March, 538* And the question is: As these dispirited  
and despairing Goths march away from the walls of Rome, with the cries 
of their dying comrades to the rear in their ears, are the 126(3 years of  
papal supremacy beginning?  
Let us turn the pages of history and see what happened next.  
The war to the end of 538* The Imperial scouts soon informed  
.Belisarius that important cities between him and Ravenna were garrisoned  
by large numbers of men* Gibbon comments:  
So powerful was this flying army, that Vitiges spared ten  
thousand men for the defence of the cities which he was most  
solicitous to preserve, and detached his nephew Uraias, xcLth 
an adequate force, for the chastisement of rebellious Milan*30  
Generally speaking, the Goths were in possession still of the *  
major cities on the west of the Flaminian way, and the Romans of those  
on the East*  
29 Ibid., p. 250*  
30 Gibbon, op. cit., II, 573«


During the remaining months of the important year 538 the pro- 
gress of the Imperial arms was not rapid, but it was steady. Urbino  
and Orvieto were taken, and the province of Aemilia was re annexed to  
the Empire. However, as the year 539 dawned, the Romans learned that  
they had sustained a terrible reverse in the reconquest of Milan by  
the Goths #31  
When the siege of Rome had end.@d, Belisarius had sent a thousand  
troops to Milan at the request of the archbishop there, and they were  
received into the city. But Uraias had been sent to regain the place.  
Belisarius had thereafter dispatched two generals to relieve it, but 
when they reached the Po, they had sat down, wondering how ever they  
could get across. Then he had ordered John and another general to go,  
but these men dared to refuse, saying that they took orders  only from  
Narses, a general who had arrived in Italy to help Belisarius.  
As a result, the Milanese were reduced to eating dogs and mice  
and finally gave in. The Goths razed much of the  city, destroyed a  
great number of its inhabitants, and then proceeded to gain control over 
the whole province of Ligo±ia#32  
The years 539 and $h0* By this time, after four years of war,  
tfit was over a ruined and wasted Italy that the wolves of war were  
growling."33 Famine and pestilence united to kill 50,000 peasants in  
31 Hodgkin, IV, 291*  
32 procopius, IV, 57* 
33 Hodgkin, IV, 301-302.


161  
one province alone. Cannibalism made its appearance. Some people ate  
their own friends. Two women ate seventeen men.^-i- 
The Goths* in spite of their sufferings, refused to give in, and  
instead devised a new method of obtaining relief. It was decided to  
send a bishop to Chrosroes* the King of Persia, to stir him up to re- 
newing the" war with the Romans in the hope that this would occasion the  
recall of the armies in Italy. These negotiations took time, and it was  
a year before they became fully effective, but the mere thought of a war  
with Persia made Justinian anxious to close up the Gothic campaign* He  
fianlly returned the ministers who had come  to him during the three- 
month truce of >38 with the offer of a long truce beneficial to both  
sides. But Belisarius refused to comply* 35  
Two more fortresses south of Ravenna still held out — Osimo near  
the east coast* and Fiesole, inland* towards the west. Belisarius took  
an array to Osimo and sent another to Fie sole. After seven months* Osimo  
and Fiesole fell* in the month of December* 539*  
As the year 5U0 began* Belisarius set himself in earnest to take  
the eiiy of Ravenna* for Ravenna* it must be remembered* and not Rome*  
was the capital city of the Goths. At this time the Franks sent envoys  
to meet other envoys from Ravenna* to talk over a proposed alliance  
against the Imperial troops* with a subsequent • divison of Italy between 
themselves* The wary Belisarius also sent envoys to meet them* and they  
3k ProcopiuSj, IV s 1+3*  
35 Hodgkin, IV, 30U-30S* '


162  
had little difficulty persuading the guileless Goths that the Franks  
were certainly far too unpredictable to be trusted just now.  
At this time also, two generals sent into the rich  Po valley to  
prevent shipments of food from reaching Ravenna were unexpectedly aided  
when the Po mysteriously dried up, stranding a fleet of  Gothic vessels  
long enough for them to destroy them — and then/resumed its normal flow.  
In Ravenna an unaccounted-for conflagration consumed the magazines.  
Uraias, marching back from Milan with a relief force, received  
news that the Romans had .captured the wives and children of his soldiers,  
and then experienced  the uncertain feeling which must have arisen when  
he saw almost his entire force surrender wholesale to the Roman forces,  
to serve against him under the Roman banners, if only they might have 
their wives and, children back again.  
Thus did unseen agencies and unpredieted events prepare the way  
for the fall of the Gothic capital in .  
While these events were transpiring, two senators arrived in  
early 5U0 from the Emperor bearing offers of peace. It was no mere truce  
this time . Justinian was willing to end the war if the Goths would be  
satisfied with the fertile plains north of the Po and would surrender  
half of their treasure.  
The Goths were dellghtedj but Belisarius had set his heart on  
subduing all Italy'and returning to Constantinople with.Vitigis in his  
train, even as he had before virtually exterminated the Vandals and then  
returned with Gelimer their king.


163  
Belisarius refused to obey*  
Sensing the delay, the Goths did an astounding thing. They  
offered to surrender the city  and the war if Belisarius would become  
their king, the Emperor of the West!  
Though it put him In a strange light with the Emperor, he tenta- 
tively accepted the offer, though without committing himself. Thus he  
gained a peaceful entry into the city — and it was notuntil days later 
that the trusting barbarians became aware that at last they had been  
conquered. "In this way did the strong and stately  city of Ravenna come  
again under the sway of a Roman Caesar, the stronghold of whose dominion  
in Italy it was destined to remain for more than two centuries."36  
When Ravenna fell, most of the other cities in northern Italy  
which contained Gothic garrison surrendered also.  
Verona and Pavia seem to have been the only cities of any  
importance still held by the unsubdued Gothic warriors. In  
Verona the command was vested in a brave chief named Ildlbad. . . .  
In Pavia the noble Uraias, nephew of Witigis, still commanded.37  
And in those few lines there is a very great significance.  
The War from $kO~$k6. The significance is this: Although the  
armies of the Ostrogoths had been reduced from 1^0,000 to one thousand, 
one thousand did remain, and they were garrisoned In these cities. All 
that is needed to make a great tree is one little seed.  
36 Ibid., p.'337.  
37 Loc. cit.


164  
Boon the 1000 had grown to 5000, mostly by desertions from the  
Imperial standards. Two reasons for this turn of events were that  
Justinian, jealous of what a-single general in Italy might make of him- 
self, recalled Belisarius and sent eleven generals to take command in 
consequence of which the soldiers grew restless) secondly, wholly un- 
reasonable taxation^ under the direction of a chief publican, Alexander  
the Logothete, began to alienate both Italians and Goths, civilian and  
soldier, from the cause of the Emperor.  
In their first show of strength in the autumn of 5i|0 the Goths  
were completely victorious. By  5^2, with Totila as their king, they  
reached sufficient size and confidence to take every Roman standard in  
a pitched battle near the Po thus effecting a disaster which had be- 
fallen the Roman legions only twice before in a thousand years of histo-
ry.39  
Feeling more secure every day they crossed the Ap#eniries and laid  
siege to Florence. Hew ever, upon the arrival of a Roman army from  
Ravenna the Goths sustained a momentary setback and retreated into the  
valley of Muguello.  
But thus was the day of great victory to be ushered in* Romans  
under John advanced to attack them there, only to suffer a reversal in  
the narrow pass, and to fall into uncontrollable panic*  
38 procopius, I?, 161. 
^ IMd., pp. 181-191.


165  
TrJhen, worst of all, it was rumored that John himself was slain  
the Romans turned and swept like an avalanche down the valley. Many  
were killed by the pursuing Goths. Others, being captured, joined  
Totila1s ranks. "But others went galloping on for days through Italy,  
pursued by no man, but  bearing everywhere the same demoralising tidings  
of rout and ruin. . . -.nUO  
How the whole of southern Italy* was opened to Totila, and he made  
the most of his chance. Justinian appointed a single general to take  
charge, but he was a coward and did nothing. Naples was retrieved in  
May, Sk3s while the Roman generals each shut himself up in whatever city  
he happened to find himself the closest to.  
Totila behaved with the utmost justice and kindness towards the.  
Italians, while the Imperial soldiers went everywhere (where there were  
no Goths) pillaging and running riot. A great sigh went up from the 
people. The generals wrote Justinian  that it was impossible to carry on  
the war and that they wanted to quit.  
And so it was that at last Justinian came to his senses and re- 
turned to Italy Belisarius -- the great, the terrible, the invincible  
Belisarius.  
Belisarius arrived in Ravenna in May, — and did nothing I  
By May of the year following he asked Justinian for help, for great fear  
had fallen upon his soldiers and the' "majority" had deserted to the Goths.  
Hodgkin, 17, 396-399,  
^ Ibid^ P* k60.


166  
Totila, however, was continuing his advance. Oslmo was retaken*  
By May, 546, Aemilia was his again. And before the end of the year, the  
unbelievable had happened. By means of-the treachery of Isaurian senti-
nals who opened one of the gates at night, Totila  entered into the city  
of Rome once more -- and right under the eyes of Belisarius at that, who  
at the moment was camped at the mouth of the Tiber suffering from an  
illness I  
¥e have nrn come to the close of the year 546 — eight full years  
after 538* The Goths who, in 540, could lay claim to only two cities of  
importance, had by now resumed domination over a large part of the  
country. It is true that the northern provinces of Liguria, Gottian  
Alps, and Venetia were in the hands of the Franks, and the provinces of  
Calabria, Lucania, and Brutii in the heel and toe of the Italian boot,  
dominated as they were by. unretaken ports, still obeyed the generals of  
the Emperor. But the heart of the country, most of the chief cities,  
and Rome itself, were by now under the control of the nplucked-up!f Goths. 1+2  
546-553* The next morning Totila hurried to the Basilica of St.  
Peter and rendered thanks to God. He then ordered his men to destroy the  
walls, and even the city itself, but desisted from doing so before the  
job was more than well begun upon receiving advice to that effect from  
the bed-ridden Belisarius.  
h2 Ibid., pp* 512-513* 619.


167  
The next important goal was Ravenna* So they left Rome  — and  
as they inarched out, they left the Sternal City without an inhabitant.^3  
After forty days of lying, desolate, the city was reinhabited — but this  
time by Belisarius. The Goths were dismayed at the news, and especially,  
when, upon returning, they found that within fifteen days, their enemy  
had completely -repaired the walls. However, Hodgkin cautions that pro- 
bably the ownership of the city was much more a matter of sentiment than  
of military significance. He says, f,Its re-occupation had little practi-
cal effect on the fotunes of the war.H^3a  
Very little happened during the next two years, but, says our  
chief guide, "the .Imperial cause slowly receded."W* In 5U8 Belisarius  
himself fled aboard ship to save his life. Later in the same year,  
Antonina secured his recall. And thus, early in SW$ Belisarius re- 
turned to Constantinople, ,fwith wealth much increased but glory somewhat  
tarnished by the events of those five years of Ms second command.11^  
Perugia fell back into Gothic hands before Belisarius arrived in  
Constantinople. Rome was again retaken in 5U9* In 550 the cities  at  
the south tip began to fall, and Totila, crossing over into Sicily, made 
it his own, and departing, left four garrisons to guard it.  
Ibid., p* 503*  
' fea ibid., p. 512.  
^ Ibid., p. 516*  
^ Ibid., p. 521*.


168  
Thus by 5513 at the peak of the Gothic re conquest, only four  
points on the coast Ravenna, Ancona, EEydruntum, .Crotona. — owed al- 
legiance to the Empire  
But suddenly all of the picture, which had so painstakingly teen  
brought to its present status, was to be changed. Justinian appointed  
Narses to take over the Gothic war* Narses was not only on good terms  
with the Emperor and popular with the people and very shrewd alike in  
peace and in war but he was also a very religious man. "His piety  
towards God and his devotion to the Virgin Mother were notorious through-
out the Court.Such a qualification, augmented as it was with stories  
of his receiving military information in visions, had a powerful effect  
on the minds of his soldiers. His appointment sounded the death knell  
of the Ostrogoths.  
In 551 the Goths suffered a defeat on the sea, and their ardor  
was dampened. Then Sicily fell. In 552 they had to raise the siege of  
Crotona.  
Finally the two armies met at Taginae in the Appenines. The Goths  
were hopelessly outnumbered. They fled in panic. Totila was slain.  
Narses took time to thank the Virgin for his. victory. The date is 552.  
Even so, the end was not yet. A small remnant,under a newly  
elected king called Teias, gathered once more in Favia. Meanwhile the  
surrender of the Gothic fortresses was going on all over Italy. Rome  
Ibid., pp. 609-613.  
Loc. cit.


169  
fell too, during this fateful summer of 552, and once more the keys of  
the city were sent to Justinian, as they had been in 536 •  
Meanwhile the sands of the Ostrogothic dominion were running  
low. With a war of extermination begun, and with the invading  
race reduced' as it now was to a few thousand men, the end could  
not be long doubtful*^®  
The end came in 553* Teias made a rush to get to Gumae where his  
brother was guarding a large supply of treasure. But on the banks of  
the Draco river he was stopped. For two months he held out. But at  
length, seeing that  death by starvation awaited them there, he and his  
handful made a last rush upon the enemy. For two full days the battle  
raged, until at last, during a lull towards evening, they gave in, on  
the promise that they might leave Italy in peace® One thousand of the  
Goths refused the terms, and joined Harses.  
All the other Goths — the remnant of that mighty host which,  
sixteen years before, marched as they thought to certain victory  
under the walls of Rome — made their way sadly over the Alpine  
passes, bidding an eternal farewell to the fair land of their 
birth.  
They disappeared, those brave Teutons, out of whom, welded  
with the Latin race, so noble a people might have been made to  
cultivate and to defend the Italian peninsula. They were  
swallowed up in we know not what morass of Gepid, of Herulian, 
of Slavonic barbarism. k9  
Into their place the Franks rushed, applying the finishing touch  
to the misery of Ita3y, until, "Alike In the northern plain, in Picenum  
^ Ibid., p. 65l*  
Ll9 B>id», p. 657*


170  
and Aemilia, and in the neighborhood of Rome, the whole population had  
disappeared.  
In darkness and obscurity indeed, the sun of the Gothic race had  
finally set.  
PERIODIC MPS OF THE GOTHIC WAR  
On the next eight pages are maps showing how the dominion of  
Italy changed hands back and forth during the years of the Gothic war.  
That portion of Italy which was in subjection to the Ostrogoths at any  
given time is indicated by the red color.  
50 Charles Oman, The Dark Ages, 476-918, p. 106.


171  
DOMINION OF  I rein  
!i DURING THE GOTHIC WAR ~  
$3*-5$3  
f | Map No.- as of 534  
AFRICA.


DURING THE GOTHIC WAR  
53^-553  
Map No. 2 , as of 536  
DALMA.TIA  
.—-s^Salona  
AFRICA


174  
DOMINION OF  
wT •fiafcu.  
/s*.i  Jcrdrximtum^ J  
Crotona  
AFRICA.


DOMINION OP  
DURING THE GOTHIC WAR  
DALMA.TIA  
ADRIATIC  
SEA  
Naples ^  
Cum^f  
•drumtum V.  
Crotona  
SICILY  
AFRICA.


DOMINION  
DURING THE GOTHIC WAR  
535-553  
DALMATIA  
ADRIATIC  
SEA  
Centum'  
cellae  
Crotona  
ermo  
AFRICA


DOMINION OF  
DURING THE GOTHIC WAR  
53^-553  
DALMATIA  
alona  
ADRIATIC  
SEA  
•drumtum\  
Crotona  
AFRICA


DOMINION OF  
DURING THE GOTHIC WAR  
535-553  
DALMATIA  
cona  
ADRIATIC  
SEA  
Naples  
•drum turn V.  
Jrotona  
AFRICA


APPENDIX VI  
A CHRONOLOGICAL CHART  
SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE  
ASSIGNING OF DATES TO THE 1260 YEARS


A CHART  
SHOWING, CHROHOLOGICALLY, THE DEVELOPMENT OF  
ASSIGNING DATES TO THE 1260 YEARS  
The accompanying chart shows at a glance the dates assigned to  
the 1260 days by more than a hundred expositors since 1190 A.D. The  
broad arrows indicate by their direction whether the expositor was 
looking forwards or backwards from his day to the conclusion of the 
predicted period; and by their length, the number of years he was 
looking through.  
Some of those who based their views on the 2300 days are indicate  
by the figure f,2300,< in parentheses. It  should be understood, however,  
that the ff(2300)tf after the Millerite and S. D. A. men indicates a 
different manner of connecting the 2300 and 1260 from what it means in  
other cases.  
Vertical lines for 533, 1798, and 1866, in addition to the  
century lines, help the eye to locate the dates most frequently cited  
by expositors. The proximity of 606 to 600 makes an extra line for  
this popular date unnecessary.  
In the cases when an expositor had two views, one is put in a  
lighter line than the other, except in the case of Robert Fleming,  
who had four views,  all of which are shown with light lines.  
Circles at the beginning and  end of some lines indicate a period  
rather than a specific date.