Last Updated on : July 26, 2013
Gogue And Magogue
GOGUE AND MAGOGUE.
These names occur together in two remarkable prophecies, the one delivered through Ezekiel (Ezek. 38:2, 3; 39:6), and the other through the apostle John (Rev. 20:8). No portion of scripture has been more mangled, perhaps, than these, yet there is none, as it appears to me, more easy to be understood. An illustration of popular opinion on the subject may be seen in Guildhall, or in "the Lord Mayor's show," where two
huge giants appear, whom the wise men of Gotham have rhantized "Gog and Magog!" Interpreters have enlightened the public upon this subject about as much as the wooden giants themselves. They generally confound the Gogue and Magogue of Ezekiel with the Gogue and Magogue of the apocalypse; but if the reader carefully examine the two testimonies, he will find that they have reference to different times exceedingly remote from each other. The apocalyptic Gogue and Magogue are the nations and their leader, who rebel against the government of Christ and the saints, 1000 years after the binding of the Greco-Roman Dragon is finished. They are the then existing nations outlying the land of Israel on the north, south, east, and west; who, being seduced from their allegiance, revolt and invade Canaan, and lay siege to Jerusalem, but are destroyed by fire from heaven. They are styled Gogue and Magogue because the confederacy is similar to that of Ezekiel's prophecy; being a combination of the posterity of the same populations to invade the same land, to take possession of the same city, and for the same purpose, namely, to seize the sceptre of universal empire, which has been the matter of contest since God first put enmity between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman [Gen. 3:15].
If the reader compare the two prophecies he will discern the following diversities, which prove them to be confederacies belonging to different epochs.
1. The Gogue of Ezekiel invades Judea "in the latter days;" [Ezek. 38:16; see vs. 8] but the apocalyptic Gogue does not invade the land till 1000 years after the binding of the dragon [Rev. 20:2, 7-8];
2. Ezekiel's Gogue goes forth from the north [Ezek. 38:15; 39:2]; John's, from the four corners of the earth [Rev. 20:8];
3. The Ezekiel-Gogue's invasion is the occasion of the Lord's manifestation and therefore pre-millennial [Ezek. 38:16, 23; 39:7, 13, 21-29]; but that of John's is after the Lord has reigned with his saints on earth 1000 years, and therefore post-millennial [Rev. 20:2-9];
4. The Lord himself brings the Ezekiel-Gogue against his land [Ezek. 38:4, 16-17; 39:2]; but some arch rebel stirs up hitherto loyal nations against the government, and as the apocalyptic Gogue and Magogue defy the king already in Jerusalem [Rev. 20:7-8];
5. The Lord brings the Ezekiel-Gogue up to battle against Jerusalem, that he may be made known to the nations [Ezek. 38:16, 23; 39:7, 13, 21-29]; but John's Gogue has known him for 1000 years [Rev. 20:2-9]; and
6. A sixth part of Ezekiel's Gogue escapes destruction, and the dead are buried [Ezek. 39:2]; but John's Gogue is entirely destroyed [Rev. 20:9].
The prophecy of Ezekiel concerning Gogue evidently relates to a power that is to arise hereafter; for the Lord says in his address to its chief, "In the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them." [Ezek. 38:8] In another verse of this chapter, the "latter years" are termed "latter days," [Ezek. 38:16] as it is written: and thou shalt come up against my people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land; it shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land." [Ezek. 38:16] This testimony shows that there will have been a gathering of the Jews to some extent before Gogue invades their land; and that this gathering is subsequent to a long desolation of the country. Hence, those acquainted with Jewish History will perceive directly, that the prediction has not been fulfilled; but is yet in the future, and belongs to "the time of the end," [Dan. 8:17; 11:35, 40;12:4, 9] which is synchronous with "the latter days." [Num. 24:14; Deut. 4:30; 31:29 (Job. 19:25); Jer. 23:20; 30:24; 48:47; 49:39; Ezek. 38:16; Dan. 2:28; 10:14; Hosea 3:5]
The prophecy of Gogue commences at the events set forth in the forty-first verse of the eleventh of Daniel. In short, Ezekiel's prophecy of Gogue is an amplification of Daniel's concerning the king of the north. That these two powers are the same will be manifest from the following considerations:
1. Gogue, or the prince of Ros, is king of Meschech and Tubal, therefore he is king of the north geographically; those countries being north of the Holy Land, which, according to the covenant, extends to Amanus and the Euphrates;
2. Gogue is to invade the land of Israel "from the north parts" [Ezek. 38:15 (see vs. 6)] and "in the latter days;" [Ezek. 38:16] and the king of the north is to enter into the same country at the same time; therefore, as they come against the same enemy and at the same time, they must be one and the same power;
3. The Libyans and Ethiopians belong to Gogue's army; and Daniel testifies, that "the Libyans and Ethiopians are at the steps of the king of the north," [Dan. 11:43] that is, they march among his troops;
4. Hostile tidings come to Gogue from Sheba and Dedan eastward; and from "the Merchants of Tarshish and the young lions thereof" [Ezek. 38:13] northward; so also, "tidings out of the east and out of the north," says Daniel, "shall trouble the king of the north;" [Dan. 11:44]
5. Gogue is to "fall upon the mountains of Israel," [Ezek.39:4] where he and his multitudes are to be buried; so the king of the north
having encamped "between the seas in the glorious holy mountain," the hill-country, "comes to his end" there, with "none to help him:" [Dan. 11:45] and,
6. Gogue unexpectedly encounters the Lord God in battle on the mountains of Israel, and the king of the north contends with Michael the great prince, who standeth up for Israel, and delivers them: they are both defeated and deprived of dominion by the same supernatural power.
Here, then, are six particulars which clearly establish the identity of Gogue with the king of the north. The multitudes they are destined to lead into the Holy Land are the "all nations" which Zechariah has predicted the Lord will gather together against Jerusalem, to destroy them in battle with a small exception (Zech. 14:2); and whose slain are "the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against the Lord, whose worm shall not die, nor their fire be quenched; and who shall be an abhorring to all flesh " (Isaiah 66:24), who pass through "the valley of the passengers on the east of the sea" (Ezek. 39:11): for the consumption of their bodies by the worm will commence while they are yet standing alive upon their feet (Zech. 14:12); so that like Antiochus Epiphanes, the stench of their consuming bodies will "stop the noses of the passers by." [Ezek.39:11]
The prophet Ezekiel is addressed by Jehovah [Yahweh] as the type, or representative, of Him, who is to vanquish Gogue on the mountains of Israel. Hence, he says to him, "Son of Man, set thy face against Gogue, the land of Magogue, the chief prince of Meshech, and Tubal, and prophecy against him." [Ezek. 38:2] In this title to the prophecy, the antagonists are indicated, namely, the Son of Man on one side, and Gogue on the other. But, while it is quite clear who the Son of Man is, it is but little understood what power is represented by Gogue. It will, therefore, be my endeavor in the following pages to identify this adversary of Israel and their king; so that the reader may know which of "the powers that be" [Rom. 13:1] is chosen of God to personate the serpent's head when it is crushed by the woman's Seed.
The Jews appointed by Ptolemy Philadelphus, king of Egypt, to translate the Old Testament into Greek, gave a different rendering of the above title to that which appears in the English version. They rendered the original by (Iwg, arcouta, Rws, Mesoc, kai Oobel) i.e. Gogue, prince of Ros, Mesoch, and Thobel; so that the difference of the two translations turns upon the
Hebrew word rosh being regarded as a proper, or common, noun. The Seventy were sensible, that in this place it was not an appellative noun, but a proper name; and they rendered it accordingly by Ros. But Jerome not finding any such proper name among the nation-families mentioned in Genesis, rather disputed the septuagint reading, and preferred to consider the word Ros as a common noun; and his interpretation, established in the Latin Vulgate, has universally prevailed throughout the west. Jerome, however, was more scrupulous than the editors of later versions, who have unqualifiedly rejected it as a proper name; for although he inclined to the other rendering, he did not feel authorized to reject altogether one so ancient, and he has therefore preserved them both, translating the passage thus -- "Gogue, terram, Magogue, principem capitis (sive Ros) Mosoch et Thubal."
But the question between the phrases "the chief prince," and "the prince of Ros," has been long set at rest by the concurring judgment of the learned, who have adopted the primitive interpretation of the Alexandrine Jews. And although the common english version has not the benefit of their decision, yet the title of the prophecy has been generally received among the erudite portion of the western nations for nearly 200 years, according to the ancient Greek interpretation; that is to say, as uniting the three proper names of nations Ros, Mosc, and Tobl. By the insertion of vowels, or vowel-points, these words have been made to assume the different forms of Meshech, Mesoch, Tubal, and Thobel; but, as the meaning of Hebrew words depends not on the points, but upon the radical consonants, or letters, it may be as well to express these names by the forms and elements of the original words, for by so doing we keep nearer to the original idea, and are less likely to be mystified by hypothesis. "Ros," says David Levi, "is not an appellative, as in the common translation of the Bible, but a proper name." The word "chief" ought, therefore, to be replaced by the proper name Ros, or Rosh.
But what nations are signified by these three proper names? This question has been long since determined by the learned. The celebrated Bochart, about the year 1640, observed in his elaborate researches into Sacred Geography, that Ros is the most ancient form under which history makes mention of the name of RUSSIA; and he contended that Ros and Mosc properly denote the nations of Russia and Moscovy. "It is credible,"
says he, "that from Rhos and Mesech (that is the Rhossi and Moschi) of whom Ezekiel speaks, descended the Russians and Moscovites, nations of the greatest celebrity in European Scythia." We have, indeed, ample and positive testimony, that the Russian nation was called Ros by the Greeks in the earliest period in which we find it mentioned, as (EquoV de oi RwV Skuqikon, peri ton arktwon Tauron); that is, "the Ros are a Scythian nation, bordering on the northern Taurus." And their own historians say, "It is related that the Russians (whom the Greeks called Ros, and sometimes Rosos) derived their name from Ros, a valiant man, who delivered his nation from the yoke of their tyrants."
Thus, then, we discern the modern names of Russia and of Moscow, of Moskwa, in the ancient names of Ros and Mosc, or Muse. It is not difficult to recognize in Tobl, Tubl, or Thobel, a name which naturally connects itself with them; and which, in conjunction with them, tends, in a very remarkable manner, to determine and fix the proper object of the prediction. The river Tobol gives name to the city Tobolium, or Tobolski the metropolis of the extensive region of Siberia, lying immediately eastward of the territories of Moscovy, or Mosc. Tobol and Mosc are mentioned together by Ezekiel, who characterizes them as nations trading in copper (Ezek. 27:13); a metal which, it is notorious, abounds in the soil of Siberia; a region which includes all the northern part of Asia which borders on Russia to the west, on the Ice-Sea [Artic Ocean] to the north, on the Eastern Ocean [Pacific Ocean] on the east, and on Great Tartary [central Asia] to the south. And thus the three denominations Ros, Mosc, and Tobl, united in the prophecy, point out, with equal capacity and conciseness, those widely extended regions, which, at the present day, we denominate collectively THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE.
Gogue is styled the "Prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl," [Ezek. 38:2,3; 39:1] that is, Autocrat of the Russians, Moscovites, and Siberians, or of "All the Russias." But, he is also styled "Gogue, of the land of Magogue," [Ezek. 38:2] as well. There is something important in this. It affirms that he is sovereign of Magogue as well as prince of all the Russias for there, at the time of the prophecy, is his proper dominion. "Whoever reads Ezekiel," says Michaelis, "can hardly entertain a doubt that Gogue is the name of a sovereign, and Magogue that of his people; the prophet speaks of the former, not as a people, but as AN EMPEROR." Let us, then, now inquire, where is the region styled Magogue; that we may
be enabled to ascertain of what people besides the Russians, Gogue will be the Emperor. And as Gomer, and Togarmah of the north quarters, are represented as being connected with him, we shall also endeavour to find out what modern nations will answer to these names.
We know from the Hebrew scriptures that Magogue and Gomer were the names of two sons of Japhet [Gen. 10:2; 1 Chron. 1:5]; and it is to ancient Hebrew authority alone that we can resort to learn where, according to the common repute of the Israelites, the nations which descended from these two heads of families, and which long retained the proper names of those heads, were spread and established. Josephus says, "that Japhet, the son of Noah, had seven sons who, proceeding from their primitive seats in the mountains of Taurus and Amanus, ascended Asia to the river Tanais (or Don); and there entering Europe, penetrated as far westward as the Straits of Gibraltar, occupying the lands which they successively met with in their progress; all of which were uninhabited; and bequeathed their names to their different families, or nations. That Gomer founded the Gomari, whom the Greeks, at that time, called Galatae -- and that Magogue founded the Magogae, whom the Greeks then called Scythae." It only, therefore, remains for us to ascertain, which were the nations that the Greeks, in the time of Josephus, called Scythae, and which they then called Galatae; and to observe whether the geographical affinities of these nations are such as answer to those which are plainly required by the prophecy for Magogue and Gomer.
Herodotus, the most ancient Greek writer accessible, acquaints us, "that the name Scythae was a name given by the Greeks to an ancient and widely extended people of Europe, who had spread themselves from the river Tanais, or Don, westward, along the banks of the Ister, or Danube." "The Greeks," observes Major Rennel, "appear to have first used the term Scythia, in its application to their neighbours, the Scythians of the Euxine [Black Sea], who were also called Getae, or Gothi; and were those who afterwards subdued the Roman empire: and from which original stock the present race of people in Europe seem to be descended." And again, "the Scythians of Herodotus appear to have extended themselves in length from Hungary, Transylvania, and Wallachia, on the westward; to the river Don on the eastward." Thus the testimony of Herodotus and Josephus is in perfect agreement concerning the progress of
Magogue and Gomer. In these same regions the Scythae continued many ages after Herodotus, and even long after the time of Josephus; for Dio Cassius, who lived 150 years after Josephus, and above 200 after Christ, relates, that Pompey, in his return into Europe from Asia, "determined to pass to the Ister, or Danube, through the Scythae; and so to enter Italy." These were the original Scythae. But Herodotus states further, that a portion of the same people, in an after age, turned back upon the European seats of their fathers, and established themselves in Asia; and from these sprung the Asiatic Scythae, who, in process of time, almost engrossed the name to themselves.
Since the name of Scythae, i.e. Magogue, is to be considered not by itself, but in geographical connection with Galatae, or Gomer, we have only to inquire, whether any geographical affinity is really ascribed by the Greeks to the Scythae and Galatae? and to ascertain to what regions of the earth those names, so associated, were applied. If we can discover these two points, we ought thereby to have discovered specifically the Magogue of the prophecy, which is to be associated with the region, or people, of Gomer.
Diodorus Siculus, who lived about a century before Josephus, traces them much further into Europe than the Danube; even to the shores of the Baltic, and to the very confines of the Galatae of the Greeks. In speaking of the amber found upon the shores of that sea, he there places the region expressly denominated, "Scythia above, or north of, Galatia." In which description we at length find the Scythae, or Magogue, in the immediate neighborhood of the Galatae of the Greeks, or Gomer.
Galatia is the common and familiar name used by all the earlier Greek historians for Gaul, the Gallia of the Latins; and Galatai is the common Greek name for Gauls, or the Galli of the Latins. Thus, "all the Galatae," (or Gauls) says Strabo, "were called Celtae by the Greeks;" and the converse is equally true: "the Celtae were called Galatae by the Greeks, and Galli by the Latins." To inquire, who were "the Galatae of the Greeks?" is, therefore, the same, as to inquire who were the Galli of the Romans? A colony of these Galatae, or Galli, indeed, in the third century before Christ, emigrated from Gaul and established themselves in Asia Minor; where they were ever after called by their Greek name, Galatians. Diodorus' "Scythia above Gaul extending towards the Baltic," accurately describes that large tract of Europe above the Rhine, or northern boundary of Gaul,
through which flow the rivers Elbe, Ems, and Weser. Here, and in the countries immediately adjoining, were the SCYTHE bordering upon the GALATAE on the north; that is to say, a considerable part of MAGOGUE, geographically associated with GOMER. ("Gomer, ex quc Galatae, id est, Galli," that is to say, "Gomer, from whom proceeded the Galatae, that is, the Gauls." lsidor. Origin lib. ix. He wrote about A.D. 600.) Diodorus elsewhere describes the northern part of Galatia, or Gaul, as confining upon Scythia. "The Greeks," says he, "call those who inhabit Marseilles and the inland territory, and all those who dwelt towards the Alps and the Pyrenean Mountains, by the name of Celts; but those who occupy the country lying to the northward, between the Ocean and the Hercynian mountain, and all others as far as Scythia, they denominate Galatae; but the Romans call all those nations by one collective appellation, Galatae; that is, Galli." These geographical affinities unite in the name of Celto-Scythae, mentioned by Strabo. "The ancient Greeks," says he, "at first called the northern nations by the general name of Scythians; but when they became acquainted with the nations in the West, they began to call them by the different names of Celts, Celto-Scythae;" and again, "the ancient Greek historians called the northern nations, collectively, Scythians, and Celto-Scythae:" which latter name plainly denoted the most western portion of the Scythae, adjoining Gaul; of the number of whom were the Scythae on the north of the Galatae, or the Sknqai uper Galatiau.
In this general description may easily be discerned, that extended portion of the West of Europe, comprehending ancient Gaul, Belgium, and the countries bordering upon them, which constituted in our day the Napoleon empire. Gomer, then, points immediately to France. It is a curious coincidence that Louis Philippe paid his visit to England in the Gomer; when this vessel was thus named, did they adopt it allusively to their country being originally peopled by the descendants of Gomer? "Scythia above Gaul," or Magogue above Gomer, or to the north of it, through which flowed the Elbe, Ems, and Weser, was the country from whence proceeded principally that renowned people, who, in the early ages of Romanism, formed an extensive confederacy with their kindred nations upon the Rhine, which had migrated successively thither from the regions of the Danube; and who, under the common denomination of FRANKS, over ran Gaul, and subdued it; and finally establishing their
power and population in the conquered country, permanently superseded the name of Gaul by that of FRANCE. "As for the seats of the Franks," says the "Universal History," "it appears from their constant excursions into Gaul, that they dwelt on the banks of the Rhine, in the neighbourhood of Mentz. All historians speak of them as placed there till their settling in Gaul. Their country, according to the best modern geographers and historians, was bounded on the north by the Ocean; on the west by the Ocean and the Rhine; on the south by the Maine; and on the east by the Weser."
These, therefore, were the Kelto-Sknqai, or Sknqai uper thu Galatian, the Celto-Scythians, or Scythians on the northern confine of Gaul; that is, Magogue in contiguity with Gomer. The Chaldean interpreter applies the name of Magogue to the Germans, in short all the ancients looked for the Magogue of scripture in the West. The Scythae of Asia, who, as we have seen, were only a partial emigration, or reflux, from their ancient stock in Europe, cannot, with any soundness of criticism, be taken account of in this argument.
"Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands," [Ezek. 38:6] is also to form a part of the Gogue's confederacy against the Holy Land in "the time of the end." [Dan. 8:17; 11:35, 40; 12:4, 9] There is little said about Togarmah in history beyond conjecture. He was a son of Gomer [Gen. 10:3], therefore his posterity would migrate originally from the same locality as Gomer's other descendants -- namely, from the mountains of Taurus and Amanus; but, instead of going westward with their brethren, they diffused themselves over "the north quarters," [Ezek. 38:6] that is, relatively to Judea. Ezekiel says, "the house of Togarmah traded in the Tyrian fairs with horses, and horsemen, and mules" (Ezek. 27:14). Hence doubtless they were a nomadic people, tending flocks and herds in the pasture lands of the north, where nature favored their production with little care and expense. Russian, and Independent, Tartary are the countries of Togarmah, from which in former times poured forth the Turcoman cavalry, "which," says Gibbon, "they proudly computed by millions." Georgia and Circassia, probably, are "bands of Togarmah's house."
These, then, are the regions which are to supply the numerous and formidable armies with which their arrogant and mighty emperor, prophetically denominated Gogue, is hereafter "to ascend as a cloud" [Ezek. 38:9; see vs. 16] against the Holy Land, not long after he shall have gone, "like a whirlwind," [Dan. 11:40] against the Little Horn.
Let us now consider, as briefly as possible, the applicability of this word to the Prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl.
"Gogue of the land of Ma-Gogue," [Ezek. 38:2] that is, styling the ruler of Magogue by the latter syllable of the name of the country over which he rules. We have seen that Magogue is the region extending from the Ros, or Russia, to the Rhine, comprehending Wallachia, Translyvania, Hungary, and Germany. Of course the prophecy must be future, because the Prince of the Ros, is the Gogue of Magogue; and as yet no emperor of Russia has been also emperor of Germany, &c. But, why is the future autocrat of Gomer, Magogue, Ros, Mosc, Tobl, and Togarmah, styled Gogue?
There is no name in the Bible which has more puzzled the critics than this of Gogue. The depths of Hebrew etymology have been explored in vain, and the versatile efforts of ingenuity in vain exerted, in the search of a mystical sense which might attach to this name. But Gogue is a Gentile, and not a Hebrew name; and Michaelis has correctly remarked, "that the origin of a barbaric, or foreign name, ought not to be sought for in the Hebrew, nor in any of its kindred tongues, as many have erroneously done." A writer some thirty-five years ago (an early 19th century writer), who very incorrectly applied the name to Napoleon, refers to Fredegarius' History as the only satisfactory account of any person of the name of Gogue. Without adapting his application of it to the French emperor, I will give the substance of what he says concerning it.
It is a proper name well known to continental history; and borne in one notable instance, by an ancient ruler, which answers immediately to the Magogue of the scriptures. Gogue was the proper name of the Major Domus Regiae, or chief of the palace, who, after having been exalted by the voice of the nation to the highest authority, fell by a violent and sanguinary death. The name of this personage appears in the history which is written in Latin under the double form of Gogos (onis) and Gogus (i); these different terminations and inflections having been suffixed to the original name. But although modern authors have followed those Latin forms, the name has nevertheless been preserved in the vernacular tongue, with its genuine, original, and simple enunciation of Gogue.
About sixty years after the death of Sigebert, king of Austrasia, A.D. 575, Fredegarius undertook to write the history of his reign; in which he gives the following account of Gogue.
"When Sigebert (grandson of Clovis) saw that his brothers had contracted marriages with women of inferior condition, he sent Gogue on an embassy to the king of Spain, to demand his daughter, Bruna, in marriage. The king sent her, with great treasures, to Sigebert; and in order to add greater dignity to her name, it was changed to Brunechildis. Sigebert received her for his consort, with great rejoicings.
"Prior to this event, and during the infancy of Sigebert, the Austrasians had made choice of the Duke Chrodinus, to be Major Domus Regiae, or chief of the palace; because he was a man of vigorous conduct in affairs, fearing God, endued with patience, and possessing no quality but what rendered him dear both to God and men. Chrodinus rejected the honor proffered to him; saying, 'I am unable to establish peace in Austrasia; for all the nobles and gentry of all Austrasia are allied to me by blood; and I have not the power of enforcing discipline among them, or of taking away the life of any man. They will all rise against me to follow their own superstitions; and God forbid, that their actions should draw me into the condemnation of hell. Choose ye, therefore, from among yourselves whom ye may approve."
"When they could find no one they chose Gogue, the tutor of the prince, by the advice of Chrodinus, to be the Major Domus Regiae. And on the following morning, Chrodinus repaired the first to the dwelling of Gogue, and placed his arm upon his neck; which the rest perceiving, they all followed his example. And thus was the government of Gogue prosperous; until he brought Brunechildis out of Spain. But she soon rendered him odious to Sigebert, who, by her instigation, put him to death.
The high authority of Gogue while he held the reigns of the Austrasian government, is strongly marked in the complimentary poems addressed to him by Fortunatus, Bishop of Poitiers, a distinguished poet of that age; from one of which the following passage translated from the Latin may be worthy of selection, on account of its geographical references, so remarkably connecting the proper name of Gogue with the Rhenish section of Magogue.
TO GOGUE HIMSELF.
"Ye clouds whose course the northern winds impel,
Or where Moselle through vineyards guides her stream,
Of the origin, or family, of Gogue, the first Maire du Palais, or Dux [means: leader, guide, commander general] Francorum [means: of the Francs], of the kingdom of Austrasia, no mention is made in history; but it is plainly to be collected from the words of Chrodinus, that he had no consanguinity with either the nobles, or the gentry -- the "primates," or "liberi," of that kingdom, and it seems equally implied in the words of Fredegarius, that he was not a native of the kingdom, since he was elected to his dignity, because the Austrasians could find no one among themselves.
Thus, it is evident that Gogue is an historical character, and that he was Regent of a part of Magogue. Now, it is probable, that, because of certain peculiarities in his history in relation to Magogue, God selected his name as the prophetic title of one, who should rule over the same country in "the time of the end." [Dan. 8:17; 11:35, 40; 12:4, 9] The resemblances between the historical, and prophetic, Gogues may be stated as follows. I shall distinguish them as Gogue I. and Gogue II.
1. Gogue I. was a foreigner; Gogue II. will be one likewise, belonging to the Ros, and not to the Germans;
2. Gogue I. became sovereign in fact, though not de jure [from the law or by right]; Gogue II. will become sovereign in fact by conquest;
3. Gogue I. became ruler in a time of confusion, because the native princes could not maintain order; weakness of the sovereigns, and anarchy of the people, will precede the de facto sovereignty of Gogue II. also;
4. Gogue I., though exalted to the highest post of honor and power, short only of the legitimate sovereignty, was precipitated from his high estate by a violent death. This is also the destiny of the prophetic Gogue, who is to "come to his end, and no one shall help him." [Dan. 11:45]
With these premises before us, I have no doubt, that the following paraphrase will present the reader with the true import
of the exordium [beginning, introduction; especially: the introductory part of a discourse or composition] to the prophecy of Ezekiel concerning Gogue.
"Son of Man, set thy face against Gogue, the emperor of Germany, Hungary, &c., and autocrat of Russia, Muscovy, and Tobolskoi [Ezek. 38:2], and prophecy against him, and say, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold I am against thee, O Gogue, autocrat of Russia, Moscovy, and Tobolskoi [Ezek. 38:3]: and I will turn thee about, and put a bit into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth from the north parts, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them accoutred with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords [Ezek. 38:4]: among whom shall be Persians, Ethiopians, and Libyans; all of them with shields and helmet [Ezek. 38:5]: French and Italians, &c.; Circassians, Cossacks, and the Tartar hordes of Usbeck, &c.: and many people not particularly named besides [Ezek. 38:6]. Be thou prepared; prepare thyself, thou, and all thy company that are assembled unto thee; and be thou Imperial Chief to them." [Ezek. 38:7]
From these premises, then, I think, there cannot be the shadow of a doubt that the autocrat of Russia, when he shall have attained to the plenitude of his power and dominion, is the subject of the prophecy contained in the thirty-eighth and thirty ninth of Ezekiel. This personage at present is only "Autocrat of All the Russias," that is, of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl; while the emperor of Austria holds the position of the Gogue of Magogue. But, as we have seen elsewhere [page 382, 1st paragraph; page 490, 1st paragraph of Elpis Israel], the Austrian and German empire is doomed to extinction by fire and sword; so that when this is broken up the Gogueship will be assumed by the autocrat, or "prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl." [Ezek. 38:2-3; 39:1]
Having proved, as I think, that the phrase "Gogue of the land of Magogue" [Ezek. 38:2] signifies Emperor of Germany, and that the particular emperor referred to will also be the "prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl" [Ezek. 38:2-3; 39:1] -- that is, that at some time hereafter, and that not far off, Nicolas, or a successor, will be both Emperor of Germany and Autocrat of All the Russias -- I proceed to remark that, although the Son of Man is his conqueror, he is to be antagonized by another power before he comes to fight his last battle, in which he loses both his life and crown. According to Daniel, this enemy hails from the north and east of Judea, but he does not tell us his name. Ezekiel, however, supplies the deficiency: he informs us that Gogue's earthly adversary occupies the countries of Sheba, Dedan, and Tarshish; and that, when the Autocrat (for Gogue is an autocrat, ruling by his own will) invades the Holy Land for the purpose of spoiling the Jews,
the Lion-power of these countries assumes a threatening attitude, and dares him to execute his purpose. "Art thou come to take a spoil? Hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey?" [Ezek. 38:13] Thus it speaks to Gogue: as much as to say, "Thou shalt not spoil Israel and subdue their country, if we can help it." The prophet Daniel, however, shows that the only effect of these threatening tidings is to make him furious; for he says, "Therefore shall he go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many." [Dan. 11:44] But furious as Daniel represents him, Ezekiel testifies that he meets with one more potently furious than himself. But this is not the Lion-power of Tarshish, but the Lord God himself "whose fury comes up into his face," [Ezek. 38:18] when he beholds the extortioner and spoiler (Isaiah 16:4) ravening upon his prey. The lion-and-merchant-power of Tarshish will not be permitted to usurp the glory of the Lion of the tribe of Judah. It is to the latter that Jehovah [Yahweh] has assigned the work of delivering his people from the destroyer. The Lion-power of Tarshish, which will possess Edom and Moab, and Ammon, as well as Sheba and Dedan, will be indeed a covert to Jehovah's [Yahweh's] outcasts (Isaiah 16:4); and therefore will "Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon escape out of his hand;" [Dan. 11:41] but it is only Michael the great prince, who commands the artillery of heaven, that can "break in pieces the oppressor." [Psa. 72:4] The men upon the face of the land shall shake at his presence; and the solid earth itself will be convulsed. He will turn their swords against themselves; and Judah shall fall upon them, and augment [to enlarge or increase, especially in size, or degree: make bigger: swell] the slain (Zech. 14:14). Mutual slaughter and pestilence will be aggravated by terrors from above; for "the Lord of hosts will visit them with thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and tempest" (Isaiah 29:5-8), and "an overflowing rain, and great hail stones, fire, and brimstone" (Ezek. 38:18-22). "Thus," saith he, "will I magnify myself, and sanctify myself; and I will be known in the eyes of many nations, and they shall know that I (Jesus) am the Lord." [Ezek. 38:23]
But what is the lion-power of which Ezekiel speaks? To ascertain this we must direct our attention to the countries named in connection with "the young lions." [Ezek. 38:13] Of these, Sheba and Dedan are districts of Arabia. The men of Dedan are in the list given by Ezekiel of the traders in the Tyrian fairs [Ezek. 27:15, 20]. The Dedanim carried thither the ivory and ebony which they procured from "the many isles" [Ezek. 27:15, 20] to the eastward, and "precious
clothes for chariots." [Ezek. 27:15, 20] Sheba carried the "chief of all spices, precious stones, and gold." [Ezek. 27:22] Dedan and Sheba were those parts of Arabia which lay convenient to the ivory, gold, precious stones, and spice countries of Africa and India. The Sultan of Muscat now rules the country of Dedan; while the British have planted their standard on the soil of Sheba, at Aden, the Gibraltar of the Red Sea, and key of Egypt. Victoria may therefore be said to be the Queen of Sheba, who may possibly live to lay her crown and treasures at the feet of the "greater than Solomon," and to fall back into the ranks of "the common people;" and, if not a prisoner of State (Psalm 149:8), to sink at least into an undistinguished member of the community. The British power, then, is the lion-power of Sheba.
As to Tarshish, there were two countries of that name in the geography of the ancients. Jehoshaphat built ships at Eziongeber [1 Kings 22:48; (see 1 Kings 9:26; 2 Chron. 8:17)], a port of the Red Sea, that they might sail thence to Tarshish. Now it will be seen by the map that they could only sail southward towards the straits of Babelmandeb, from which they might then steer east, or north for India. As they did not sail by compass in those days, but coastwise, they would creep round the coast of Arabia, and so make for Hindostan. They might have sailed southward again along the coast of Africa instead of to India; but it is not likely they did, as the commerce of the time was with the civilized world, and not the savage. The voyage occupied them three years. In the days of Solomon the trade was shared between Israel and the Tyrians; for "he had at sea a navy of Tarshish with the navy of Hiram; once in three years came the navy of Tarshish bringing gold and silver, ivory and apes, and peacocks." [1 Kings 10:22] These products point to India as the eastern Tarshish -- a country which has always conferred maritime ascendancy on the power which has possessed its trade and been its carrier to the nations.
But there was also a Tarshish to the north west of Judea. This appears in the case of Jonah, who embarked at Joppa, now Jaffa, on the Mediterranean, "to flee unto Tarshish from the presence of the Lord." [Jonah 1:3] It is evident he must have sailed westward. It is not exactly known where the western Tarshish was situated. It was a country, however, not a city, whose "merchants" frequented the Tyrian fairs. Addressing Tyre, the prophet says, "Tarshish was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of all kinds of riches; with silver, iron, tin, and lead, they traded in thy fairs." [Ezek. 27:12] These metals are the products of
Britain, celebrated by the Phoenicians as Baratanac, or "the land of tin," as some construe it. The merchandise of the northern Tarshish, and of the eastern, identifies Britain and India with the two countries of that name; and Sheba and Tarshish in the prophecy of Gogue are manifestly indicative of the Lion-power of the Anglo-Indian empire.
But, in corroboration of this, I remark further, that the lion power is represented also as a merchant power, in the words, "the Merchants of Tarshish shall say unto Gogue." [Ezek. 38:13] Having ascertained the geography of Tarshish, it is easy to answer the question, Who are its merchants? This inquiry will admit of but one answer, namely, the British East India Company, which is both the merchant and ruler of the elephant-tooth country of the east. But the association of "the young lions of Tarshish" [Ezek. 38:13] with the "merchants of Tarshish," [Ezek. 38:13] makes this still more obvious; for it represents the peculiar constitution of the Anglo Indian government. As every one knows, this government is neither purely a merchant-sovereignty, nor a purely imperial one like that of Canada, but a combination of the two. The Honorable Company has no power in Canada, but, with its imperial partner, the firm is omnipotent in India. Now the imperial member is represented in the prophet by "young lions:" [Ezek. 38:13] that is, the lion is chosen to represent the imperial British power, as the Ram and the Goat, the self-chosen emblems of the nations, were adopted to symbolize that of the Persians and Macedonians. Young rams and young goats were civil and military officials under the ram and goat sovereignties; so also "young lions" are the same under the old Lion of England. This, the lion-power, is represented in the government of India by "the Board of Control," and the imperial forces which serve with the Company's troops in the Indian army. The merchants of Tarshish govern India under the control of the lion-power -- a constitution of things well represented in the Company's arms, which are a shield whose quarterings are filled with young lions rampant, with the motto "Auspicio Senatus Angliae." From these facts, it may be concluded, that the united imperial power of Britain and merchant-power of India, is the power of the latter days, destined of God to contend with the Autocrat, when, having laid all Europe prostrate, his ambition prompts him to grasp the sceptre of the east.
But the lion-power of Britain has not yet attained the limit marked out for it by the finger of God. The conquest of Persia [see page 471, 1st paragraph of Elpis Israel]
by the Autocrat will doubtless cause England to conquer Afghanistan, and to seize upon Dedan that she may command the entrance to the Persian Gulf, and so prevent him from obtaining access to India either by land or sea. Possessing Persia and Mesopotamia, the apprehension of his pushing still further southward, and perhaps establishing himself on the north eastern coast of the Red Sea, and so taking them in the rear and gaining access to India by the straits of Babelmandeb, will also be a powerful motive for the merchants of Tarshish and its young lions to take possession of all the coast from the Gulf of Persia to the Straits, and thence to Suez, by which the lion-power will not only become the Sheba and Dedan, but also the Edom, Moab, and Ammon, of "the latter days;" [Ezek. 38:16; Num. 24:14; Deut. 4:30; 31:29 (Job. 19:25); Jer. 23:20; 30:24; 48:47; 49:39; Dan. 2:28; 10:14; Hosea 3:5] for in speaking of the events of these days, the prophets refer not to races of men, but to powers on territories designated by the names of the people who anciently inhabited them. Hence, for instance, the Lion-power planted hereafter in the ancient territory of Moab, becomes the Moab of the latter days; so that when the countries before-named are possessed and settled by the British, they will be men of Dedan in Muscat, men of Sheba in Aden and Mocha, and Moabites, Edomites, and Ammonites in their several territories. Thus, the prophecies concerning those countries in their latter-day developments have regard to the power to which they then belong, and which, I have no doubt, will be the British; which, together with the Autocrat's, though henceforth always rival dominions, will endure until both powers be broken up by the Ancient of Days.
It may be as well in this place to recall the reader's attention briefly to the vision of the four Beasts (Dan. 7). The Lion, the Bear, and the Leopard, the symbols of the Assyrian, the Persian, and of the greater dominion than that comprehended in the four heads of the Leopard, or horns of the Goat; therefore, I will call it Alexandrine (Dan. 11:3-4): these three Beasts are represented in the vision as out-living the destruction of the Fourth Beast, or Roman Dragon. Speaking of this, the prophet says, "I beheld till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning, flame." [Dan. 7:11] Having seen his violent death, he goes on to say, "As concerning the rest of the beasts they had their dominion taken away; yet a prolonging in life was given them for a season and a time." [Dan. 7:12] The meaning of this is, that at the consummation of the judgment, the territories comprehended in the dominions of the four beasts to their full
extent will be divided between two independent dominions of the Latter Days, namely, that of Gogue, and that of the Lion of Tarshish. Gogue's will include so much of the territory as to entitle his dominion to be represented by Nebuchadnezzar's Image. Assyria proper, Persia, Asia Minor, Armenia, and Mesopotamia; Egypt, Italy, Germany, Belgium, France, Spain, Portugal, Sardinia, Naples, Lombardy, Bavaria, Hungary, and Greece -- countries all included in the catalogue given by Ezekiel in his prophecy of Gogue -- are symbolized by the head, breast, body, thighs, legs, and toes of the Image. These are at the crisis united together in one dominion, which is broken to pieces as the result of the battle of Armageddon. Gogue's yoke being broken off the neck of these nations, Assyria, and Persia resume their independence; but they do not retain it long; for it is "taken away," [Dan. 7:12] yet they continue separate states for 1000 years, only ruled by the saints, whom the Lord may appoint over them.
The Lion of Tarshish is Alexandrine in its dominion, and will then possess much of the territory represented by the Unicorn Goat and the Leopard [see page 370, paragraph 3 of Elpis Israel], all indeed not included in the Image. Alexander the Great extended his conquests over Afghanistan, the Punjaub, and into India beyond the Indus. The Lion of Tarshish has already annexed much of his territory, indeed quite sufficient to confer upon it Unicorn and Leopard attributes. Its supremacy over the Ionian Republic still further approximates it to the Macedonian character; which will become still more conspicuous, when it beholds "the prince of Ros, Mosc, and Tobl" [Ezek. 38:2-3; 39:1] possessed of Constantinople, and contending for the Gogueship of Magogue; it will then, doubtless, make extensive seizures of the isles of Greece, to strengthen itself in the Mediterranean, and to antagonise as much as possible the power of the Autocrat in that direction. Thus, then, answering to the Leopard of the latter days, the Lion of Tarshish survives the destruction of the Image. But subsequent events will affect it in common with the Lion and the Bear; for though it may, in alliance with Assyria, and Persia, hold out for a time against the Stone of Israel, its "dominion will be taken away;" [Dan. 7:12] for the kingdom he is to establish will "break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms;" [Dan. 2:44] yet Assyria, Persia, and Britain will continue to exist as peoples for "a season and a time," [Dan. 7:12] being subject and obedient to the King of Israel, in the light of whose government they will walk with joy, and lay their wealth and honor at his glorious feet.