[630] On this, however, we may remark with Cornill, "Eine Apokalypse, deren ἀποκαλύψεις unenthülbar sind, wäre ein _nonsens_, eine _contradictio in adjecto_" (_Die Siebzig Jahrwochen_, p. 3). The indication was obviously _meant_ to be understood, and to the contemporaries of the writer, familiar with the minuter facts of the day, it probably was perfectly clear. [631] Luke ii. 25, 26, 38; Matt. xxiv. 15. Comp. 2 Thess. ii.; Jos., _Antt._, X. xxii. 7. [632] "Scio de hac quæstione ab eruditissimis viris varie disputatum _et unumquemque pro captu ingenii sui dixisse quod senserat_" (Jer. _in Dan._, ix.). In other words, there was not only no received interpretation in St. Jerome's day, but the comments of the Fathers were even then a chaos of arbitrary guesses. [633] Pusey makes out a table of the divergent interpretation of the commentators, whom, in his usual ecclesiastical fashion, he charitably classes together as "unbelievers," from Corrodi and Eichhorn down to Herzfeld. But quite as striking a table of divergencies might be drawn up of "orthodox" commentators. [634] Thus Eusebius, without a shadow of any pretence at argument makes the _last week_ mean _seventy years_! (_Dem. Evan._, viii.). [635] Jost (_Gesch. d. Judenthums_, i. 99) contents himself with speaking of "die Liebe zu prophetischer Auffassung der Vergangenheit, mit möglichst genauen Zahlenagaben, befriedigt, _die uns leider nicht mehr verständlich erscheinen_." [636] In Clem. Alex., _Strom._, i. 21. [637] Cornill, p. 14; Bevan, p. 54. [638] Schürer, _Hist. of Jewish People_, iii. 53, 54 (E. Tr.). This is also the view of Graf, Nöldeke, Cornill, and many others. In any case we must not be misled into an impossible style of exegesis of which Bleck says that "bei ihr alles möglich ist und alles für erlaubt gilt." CHAPTER IV _INTRODUCTION TO THE CONCLUDING VISION_ The remaining section of the Book of Daniel forms but one vision, of which this chapter is the Introduction or Prologue. Daniel is here spoken of in the third person.