No. CLI. VINDICATION OF DANIEL: HIEROGLYPHIC ANIMALS. AMONG the figures which Le Bruyn has copied from the ruins of Persepolis, in Persia, there are some which seem remarkably coincident with the purport of certain passages in the prophet Daniel. It is not easy to ascertain the æra of these ruins which are universally considered as having formed a palace of the Persian kings. Probably it is assuming too much to attribute them to Cyrus; nevertheless, if, as conjecture states, they may date soon after that monarch, they will be sufficiently ancient to justify the use we propose to make of them.

The palace of Persepolis was destroyed by Alexander the Great; yet from its remaining ruins, we infer its former grandeur. Among its ornaments are several hundred figures, sculptured on the wall in basso relievo. Some of them are certainly of a religious nature; others are emblematical; of these, several have greatly the appearance of being political emblems, commemorating past events, which, being flattering to the Persian kings, they wished to perpetuate the memory of. Under this aspect they justify examination. Let us hear Le Bruyn's account of these figures. Nos. 8, 9, are the immediate subjects of our inquiry; but as No. 5. is intimately connected with them, we shall offer together the extracts which relate to them all. They are represented on Plate, No. 44. Compare Plate, No. 101: 1, 2:

"These portals are twenty-two feet and four inches in depth, and thirteen feet and four inches in breadth. In the inside, and on each pilaster, is seen a large figure in low relief, and almost as long as the pilaster; with a distance of twenty-two feet from the fore to the hinder legs, and a height of fourteen feet and a half. The heads of these animals are entirely destroyed, and their breasts and fore feet project from the pilaster. Their bodies are likewise greatly damaged." Page 11.

"These animals are not cut out of one stone, but out of three, joined together, and which project without the portal." Ib.

"With respect to the animals I have mentioned, it would be difficult to determine what they represent, unless it may be said that they have some similitude to a sphinx, with the body of a horse, and the paws thick and short, like those of a lion. But all this is rendered the more uncertain, because the heads are broken into shatters. Some persons have pretended, that they represented human heads, and, it must be owned, there is some appearance, on the hinder part of the neck of one of these monsters, which may seem to justify that conjecture. It is a kind of a contour, or crowned bonnet. One might even say, that they are covered with arms, [armour?] adorned with a good number of round studs." Ib. Comp. FRAGMENTS, No. CCLXXXIII.

"The figures in the two first portals very much resemble a horse, both before and behind, only the head seems to be like that of an ape; and indeed the tail has no great similitude to that of a horse; but this may be imputed to the ornaments which are fastened to it, and were much used among the ancient Persians." Page 39. N. B. The foregoing descriptions refer to No. 5. on Plate.

"Under a portal to the west, is the figure of a man hunting a bull, who has one horn in his forehead, which is grasped by the man's left hand, while his right plunges a large dagger into the belly of the bull. On the other side, the figure of another man clasps the horn with his right hand, and stabs the beast with his left. The second portal discovers the figure of a man carved in the same manner, with a deer that greatly resembles a lion, having a horn in his forehead, and wings on the body. The same representations are to be seen under the portal to the north, with this exception, that, instead of the deer, there is a great lion, whom a man holds by the mane." Page 15. "There are also two other figures on each side, in the two niches to the south one

of which grasps the horn of a goat with one hand, while the other rests on the neck of that animal." Page 18.

"In one of these portals, to the east, we observed the figure of a man encountering a lion; and in another compartment, a man fighting with a bull. We likewise beheld, under the two portals to the west, several figures of lions, one of which is represented with wings." Page 19.

"The Spanish ambassador was persuaded, that the animal attacked by the lion, on the stair-case, represents an ox, or a bull; but I rather think it intended for a horse or an ass. This particular piece of sculpture is no more than a hieroglyphic, representing virtue victorious over force; and every one knows, that the ancient Persians and Egyptians concealed their greatest mysteries under equivocal figures, as Heliodorus observes.

"As all these animals, therefore, are represented with horns, which are not natural to them, some mystery must certainly be intended by that sculpture; and this supposition seems the more reasonable, because it is well known that horns were anciently the emblem of strength, and even of majesty itself." Pages 38, 39.

"I take the other figure, which encounters a lion, and is habited like a Mede, to be an hieroglyphic; because the Egyptians, from whom the Persians borrowed several customs, represented strength and fortitude, by the figure of a lion. The reader may consult Clemens Alexandrinus with relation to this particular. It may likewise be intended for a real combat, the Medes and Persians having been very fond of encountering animals, as Xenophon observes in his Institution of Cyrus.' Those who are versed in antiquity may judge of these figures as they think proper."

It is evident from these extracts, that Le Bruyn had no fixed opinion, as to what these figures represent. Without controverting what he offers, we shall propose our own conceptions. For No. 5, see the following Fragment--"Thoughts on the Cherubim." No. 8. represents a man who has seized a lion with one hand in his other hand he holds a sword, as if drawn back, in order to plunge it the more forcibly into the body of the lion; the lion is lifted up from the earth, and stands upright on his hind legs; he looks behind him, as if fearing harm from thence. This lion is partly clothed with feathers; and these, from their size, &c. have the appearance of being eagle's feathers his feathers seem to be diminishing; at least he is by no means so full of feathers as No. 9. The man, from his cap, &c. is doubtless a person of distinction; in fact, a Persian king, victorious over a power denoted by a lion; but possessed of the additional strength and celerity of an eagle. The corresponsence of events is thus:

EMBLEMATICAL REPRESENTATION.

1. I saw a lion,

2. Having eagle's wings;

3. The wings were plucked;

4. It was raised from the ground,

5. Made to stand on its feet as a man,

6. A man's heart [intellect] was given to it. Dan. chap vii.

HISTORICAL NARRATION.

1. The Babylonian empire:

2. Nineveh added to it-but,

3. Nineveh almost destroyed at the fall of Sardanapalus:

4. Again raised, but by artificial means,

5. To stand in an unnatural posture,

6. Through the policy and good management of its king; perhaps Nebuchadnezzar.

Does not this sculpture represent the destruction of this metaphorical lion? at least, the ideas are remarkably coincident: they differ but as the language of sculpture necessarily differs from that of poetry.

No. 9. also represents a man, certainly no less a personage than a king; who with one hand seizes the [single] horn of an animal, which he has attacked; while with the other hand he plunges a sword into its belly. This animal has the body, fore legs,

and head of a beast; he is also greatly clothed with feathers, has wings, and birds' legs, on which he stands upright. He seems to make a stout resistance:

It is not easy to determine what beast is represented in this number, but it seems to be clear that the king is breaking its [single] horn (power), and destroying it. It probably alludes to some province of the Persian empire, acquired by victory: and most likely, the other emblems in this palace have similar reference: for we learn from Diodorus, that military actions of the Egyptian monarchs were represented on the temples and palaces of Egypt: and we may fairly presume that the vanity of Persia would not be inferior to that of Egypt.

Our opinion is, that these figures represent the king, [or the deity, under whose auspices the king conquered] by whom the neighbouring powers allegorized by these figurative beasts, were subdued; and that these are allusions to such actions: but this opinion goes no farther, than to acknowledge their coincidence with the animals described by the prophet Daniel; whose emblems are not only justified by the comparison, but it proves, also, that such national allegories were in use at that time, and were then well known and publicly admitted. Vide Plate No. 104.

N. B. It is remarkable, that Daniel does not determine the species of the fourth beast; perhaps because its insignia were then unknown in so distant a region as Persia. That ancient opponent of Christianity, Porphyry, affirmed that the book of Daniel was a history written figuratively after the events it refers to had happened; even after Antiochus Epiphanes, and long after the empire of the Greeks; and Professor Eichorn seems to adopt his notion; now, as the emblems on this palace are, at all events, prior to Alexander, who destroyed them, and have no Greek allusions among them, their antiquity becomes a voucher for the antiquity of Daniel, with whom they coincide so remarkably; and if the antiquity of Daniel be established, his prophetic character follows, of course. The reader will reflect on the importance of establishing the antiquity of Daniel; since our calculations of the time of the Messiah's coming, &c. originate from this prophet, who remarkably, clearly, and systematically, calculates the periods and dates of following events.

N. B. The reason why Daniel calculates so systematically, perhaps was, because he dwelt in Babylon, &c. where a new Era had lately been established, which we call that of Nabonassar; this formed a fixed point, of which his proficiency in Chaldean studies enabled him to avail himself. No such Era was as yet adopted in Greece, Judea, Syria, &c.

No apology is necessary for supposing that the reader is now of the same opinion as ourselves, that the foregoing considerations, as instances (and many others might be selected), should be well understood, and maturely weighed, before we deprive Daniel of the station he occupies in our sacred books.

[For the miracle of the letters on the wall of Belshazzar's palace, vide No. ccv.]

No. CLII. THOUGHTS ON THE CHERUBIM.

IF the reader has ever had the misfortune to be engaged in a Chancery suit, he will well understand, that in proportion to the length of the bill must be that of the answer : and he will be disposed to pardon the extent of this dissertation, and that attention which has been thought necessary to those lesser circumstances, which, in many other cases might have been assumed without risk of contravention. Mr. Parkhurst has employed no fewer than sixty articles in his Lexicon, on this subject; and it has furnished to several learned writers, materials for considerable treatises; we do not mean to add another to their number, though we cannot avoid treating the matter with

some consideration: and while aware of the room it will occupy, we claim applause for condensing it within a reasonable compass.

The reader will previously peruse the article CHERUBIM in the Dictionary. By the description of those hieroglyphic animals, it appears that they were compound figures: in attempting to ascertain the nature of their composition, it is proper to direct our attention to their parts, separately.

I. Of their HEADS, or COUNTENANCES. Each cherub had four faces: 1. that of a man; 2. that of a lion; 3. that of an ox; 4. that of an eagle. In what manner were these placed? were they four heads attached to four necks, rising from the trunk of the body; or four faces attached to one head? We think they were four faces attached to one head, and seen by the beholder in union, being joined, each by its back part, to the others.

II. Of their bodies; i. e. from the neck downwards. This was human; "the likeness of a man." Certainly, this extended below the navel, and to the lower rim of the belly, which might answer in proportion of length and breadth, to the neck and upper part of the ox; or rather, to what those parts of the ox might have been, had the whole figure been that of an ox. This human part first meeting the spectator's eye, had he seen nothing else, he might from thence have supposed the whole form to be human.

III. Of their WINGS. Ezekiel describes the cherub as having four wings ;-Isaiah describes the seraph as having six wings: say, for the present, that each had six wings, viz. two on his head, two on his shoulders, two on his flanks.

IV. Of their ARMS. These are rendered in our translation hands; but certainly imply arms at length; their number was four, one on each side of the creature.

V. What was the remainder, or LOWER PART, of their figure? We conceive it was, from the rim of the belly, downwards, either, 1. human thighs, legs, and feet, to which were appended, at the posteriors, the body and hind legs of an ox: or, rather, 2. the body and the fore legs of an ox, out of which the human part seemed to rise, so that all below the rim of the belly was ox-like, and all above that division was human. From which formation a spectator paying most attention to their lower parts, might have been inclined to think them oxen; or at least bestial.

VI. Their SERVICES; or, what they appeared to do. Was the vision seen by the prophet Ezekiel, as well as that seen by the prophet Isaiah, the resemblance of a moveable throne or chariot, of prodigious dimensions, on which the Sovereign was understood to sit : to which the wheels were annexed in much the same manner as to the royal travelling (or military) thrones of the Persian kings; while the four cherubim occupied the places of four horses to draw this magnificent machine?

As this idea is unusual, yet appears to us to open the true intent of the vision, we shall endeavour to illustrate and confirm it:

Gen. iii. 24. "He placed at the east of the garden of Eden, Cherubim, and a flaming sword [a sword infolding itself ], which turned every way to keep the way of the tree of life."

We suppose this sole of their feet means the whole hoof. As human feet are not mentioned, we conclude that all their feet were bestial.

The arms-rather than the hands-of a man were under their wings.

Ezekiel, chapter i. Behold a whirlwind came out of the north; a GREAT CLOUD, and a fire infolding itself; and a brightness about it; and out of the midst thereof the likeness of FOUR living creatures. They had the likeness of a man; each had four FACES; each had four wings. Their feet were straight feet, the sole of their feet was like that of a beast; they sparkled like burning brass. The hands of a man were under their wings, on their four sides; and they four had their faces, and their wings.-Their

Certainly, these descriptions imply a king sitting on a throne, that throne composed of splendours-in the midst of a firmament of splendours:-but, these are not at present the subjects of our consideration.

20