synchronism of Polybius, the invasion of Rome by the Gauls took place in the second year of the ninety-eighth Olympiad (B.C. 386). The Kelts or Gauls broke through the thin screen which had hitherto concealed them from sight, and began for the first time to take their part in the great drama of the nations. For nearly two hundred years they continued to fill Europe and Asia with the terror of their name; but it was a passing tempest.' (Arnold's Hist. of Rome, chap. 22,) The Romans, terrified at the capture of Rome by the Gauls, never forgave them, but persistently retaliated through a struggle of centuries, until not only Gaul but also Britain was subjugated. But what Manassehi could not do by mere valor, Ephraim accomplished by perseverance and general executive ability. "Mad Caracalla telling the Teutons that they ought to come over the Rhine and destroy the empire, and then murdering the interpreters, lest they should repeat his words, was but babbling out, in an insane shape, the thought which was brooding in the most far-seeing Roman minds. He felt that they could have done the deed; and he felt rightly, madman as he was. They could have done it then, if physical power and courage were all that was needed, in the days of the All-man war. They could have done it a few years before, when the Markmen fought Marcus Aurelius Antoninus; on the day when the Cæsar, at the advice of his augurs, sent two lions to swim across the Danube as a test of victory, and the simple Markmen took them for big dogs, and killed them with their clubs. From that day, indeed, the Teutons began to conquer, slowly, but surely. Though Antoninus beat the Markmen on the Danube, and recovered one hundred thousand Roman prisoners, yet it was only by the help of the Vandals: from that day the empire was doomed, and the Teutons only kept at bay by bribing one tribe to fight another, or by enlisting their more adventurous spirits into the Roman legions to fight against men of their own blood. But the Teutons might have done it a hundred years before that, when Rome was in a death-agony, and Vitellius and Vespasian were struggling for the purple, and Civilis and the fair Velleda, like Barak and Deborah of old, raised the Teuton tribes. But there was no unity among them,-no feeling that they were brethren of one blood. Had the Teuton tribes at any of these great crises, and at many a crisis afterwards, united

for but three years, under the feeling of a common blood, language, interest, destiny, Rome would have perished." (Roman and Teuton.)

But they did it! They dashed old Rome in pieces, vindicating their title as YAHVEH'S "battle-axe and weapons of war." (Jer. li. 20.) And their descendants, when they reflect on that fearful conflict which their fathers waged with Rome, and think of the marvellous history of the Teutonic race from that triumph unto the present day, can have no difficulty in acknowledging the presumptive evidence that so clearly supplements the scriptural proof of our identity with lost Israel. The Professor of History in English Cambridge almost does it, without knowing how literally he speaks the truth that YAHVEH reveals by the Holy Spirit. In concluding his lectures on "The Roman and the Teuton," he says, "Was this campaign fought without a general? If Trafalgar could not be won without the mind of a Nelson, or Waterloo without the mind of a Wellington, was there no one mind to lead those innumerable armies, on whose success depended the future of the whole human race? Did no one marshal them in that impregnable convex front from the Euxine to the North Sea? No one guide them to the two great strategic centres of the Black Forest and Trieste? No one cause them--blind barbarians, without maps or science-to follow those rules of war without which victory in a protracted struggle is impossible, and, by the pressure of the Huns behind, force on their flagging myriads to an enterprise which their simplicity fancied at first beyond the powers of mortal men? Believe it who will, but I cannot. I I may be told that they gravitated into their places, as stones and mud do. They obeyed natural laws, of course, as all things do on earth, when they obeyed the laws of war; those, too, are natural laws, explicable on simple mathematical principles. But while I believe that not a stone or a handful of mud gravitates into its place without the will of God,—that it was ordained, ages since, into what particular spot each grain of gold should be washed down from an Australian quartz reef, that a certain man might find it at a certain moment and crisis of his life,— shall I not believe that though this great war had no general upon earth, it may have had a general in heaven? and that, in spite of all their sins, the hosts of our forefathers were the hosts of God?"

COALITION OF EPHRAIM AND MANASSEH.

IF the Teuton and Celt are brothers, why have they always been so much at variance? History gives a constant record of their mutual hatred from the time when they first occupied opposite banks of the Rhine. Beginning with German against Gaul, followed by Saxon against Briton, and so down through all the modern variations, the same scene is exhibited, if not always of bloodshed, yet always of bitterness and rancor. certain fatality of history has perpetually helped to separate still more widely the two races, instead of detecting and assimilating the elective affinities which existed." (Motley's "Rise of the Dutch Republic," vol. i. p. 6.)

"A

This "fatality of history" is simply the ordination of YAHVEH. When the ten tribes were driven out of their inheritance, they were given over to mutual extermination. "Wickedness burneth as the fire: it shall devour the briers and thorns, and shall kindle in the thickets of the forest." (Isa. ix. 18.) History responds to this description of the country where the dreadful tragedy was to be enacted. From the Euxine to the North Sea "the land was covered with vast forests and marshes." (Döllinger.) The prophet continues, "And they shall mount up as the rising of smoke. Through the wrath of YAHVEH of hosts is the land darkened, and the people shall be as the fuel of the fire: no man shall spare his brother." Celt should murder Celt, and Teuton should kill Teuton. But if German fought with German, and Celt with Celt, German would unite with German against Celt joined with Celt. "They shall eat every man the flesh of his own arm· Manasseh, Ephraim; and Ephraim, Manasseh: and they together shall be against Judah. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still." And here is explained the "fatality of history" that for so long a time has kept apart the two races which, in the words of a modern observer, are "the most fitted by nature of any two races in the world to be the completing counterpart of each other." (John Stuart Mill.) Manasseh against Ephraim, and Ephraim against Manasseh, and both against Judah: what an epitome of European history for more than a thousand years! Celt against Teuton, and Teuton against Celt, and they both against Jew.

But the opposition must end. The twelve tribes of Israel, sc long divided in three,-Ephraim, Manasseh, Judah,—are to become "one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel." (Ezek. xxxvii. 22.) And Judah will not be united with Israel until after the two fragments of Israel shall have become one body, until Teuton and Celt shall have fraternally coalesced, until "the thousands of Manasseh" shall have been emptied into "the ten thousands of Ephraim." For when the union with Judah takes place, "the rod of Joseph is in the hand of Ephraim” (Ezek. xxxvii. 19), that the word of YAHVEH by the patriarch Jacob may be fulfilled, "Ephraim's seed shall become the fulness of the nations." Then "the envy of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim." (Isa. xi. 13.)

How, then, was the coalition to be effected? Was it to be a short work, accomplished at a stroke, or was there to be a gradual growing together of the two elements? If the latter, how would it begin? Evidently, not by mutual agreement in any place; for the hatred was too intense. Then would it be by the attack and subjugation of one race by the other? and, if so, of Manasseh by Ephraim? To this history assents. It tells of two great assaults made by the German on the Celt, one of which was at first apparently successful, and then failed; the other was a triumph.

The failure was in ancient Gaul. "The Rhine, which formed the geographical boundary between Gaul and Germany, was never a barrier capable of restraining the migratory propensities of the northern races, or preventing the repeated transit of invaders from the right to the left bank. Accordingly, the Kymric population in the northern region of Gaul was constantly harassed by the Teutonic hordes which pressed hungrily on its rear. The Germans, who had introduced themselves within the limits of Gaul, were already in the time of Cæsar intermixed in a great degree with the earlier possessors, besides retaining, in some localities, their own names and characteristics. . . . But, notwithstanding the familiar intercourse thus established, the enmity between the two races continued unabated, the Germans hovering on the banks of the Rhine with numbers and courage daily augmenting, the Gauls crouching in terror before an enemy whom they dared not encounter, or even inviting him within their frontiers to fight their

battles for them. The time had long passed since the Gauls had been an emigrating and conquering people. Their incursions into the German territories had once been no less numerous and successful than those by which they had possessed themselves of onehalf of Italy and devastated nearly the whole. But step by step they had been forced back, in both quarters, by nations fiercer or better disciplined than themselves. The progress of moral and physical culture among them had taken a direction which paralyzed their means of defence both against the Germans and the Romans. It enervated their bodies and subdued their daring courage as compared with the wild barbarians of the north, while it had no tendency to impart community of sentiment and identity of purpose." (Merivale's Hist. of the Romans under the Empire, vol. i. pp. 225, 227.)

The consequence of this assault by the German on the Gaul was the establishment of a German government, known as the kingdom of the Franks, the glory of which culminated in the reign of Charlemagne. After his death his empire speedily fell to pieces, and with its decay evaporated almost every result of the effort that the Teuton had made to Germanize the Gaul. Nearly every trace of Frankish influence disappeared except their name. A modern French historian remarks, "Those Franks, from whom we derive our name, were destined to leave among us infinitely fewer traces than the Romans; they did little more than revive in Gaul those of the Gallic elements which corresponded to the Germanic elements: as to the characteristics especially peculiar to the Germanic race, we retained almost nothing of them, unless in a few of the northern and eastern provinces." (Martin.) "Nothing is more remarkable in the civil or in the religious history of the West, nothing led to more momentous or enduring results, than the secession, as it were, of the great kingdom of France from the Teutonic and its adhesion to the Latin division of Christendom; the fidelity of its language to its Roman descent, and its repudiation of the German conqueror. There can be no doubt that the great mass of the French language is of Latin origin.” (Milman's Latin Christianity, vol. viii. p. 350.)

1

Thus the coalition failed in this instance; but in the other it was a grand success. The continent was the place of failure; the triumph was in the island of Britain. The subtle influence of