Daniel · Chapter 7

1-8. The vision of God’s throne of government and judgment, ver. 9-14. The interpretation of those visions, ver. 15-28.

V. 1. In the first year of Belshazzar-This prophecy is written in Chaldee, to be a monument to him, of the reverence his father and grandfather shewed towards God, who had done such mighty works for them. Then he wrote-These visions were recorded for the benefit of the church, to rectify their mistake: for they thought all things would succeed prosperously after they returned out of their captivity.

Verse 1. In the first year of Belshazzar] This is the same Belshazzar who was slain at the taking of Babylon, as we have seen at the conclusion of Daniel 5:30, 31. That chapter should have followed both this and the succeeding. The reason why the fifth chapter was put in an improper place was, that all the historic parts might be together, and the prophetic be by themselves; and, accordingly, the former end with the preceding chapter, and the latter with this. The division therefore is not chronological but merely artificial.

Told the sum of the matters.] That he might not forget this extraordinary dream, he wrote down the leading particulars when he arose.

Verse 1. In the first year of Belshazzar, &c. — The prophet, having related some remarkable passages concerning himself and his brethren in captivity, and having given proof of his supernatural illumination in interpreting other men’s dreams, proceeds to give an account of his own visions; and thereupon goes back to the first year of Belshazzar’s reign, which was seventeen years before the history contained in the last chapter. This vision concerns the same events with those referred to in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, chap. 2., with some enlargements and additions, and different images.

Verse 1. In the first year of Belshazzar. The book of Daniel is divided into two parts; the first six chapters being historic, and the latter prophetic. This dream of Daniel’s has a connection with that which regarded Nebuchadnezzar, in Daniel 2:15, 26. Both those princes were proud and wicked men; yet God had mercy on them and on their people, and was graciously pleased to give them admonition by special revelations of future times. Daniel dreamed of the four beasts, but the interpretation was in vision when awake, and by this vision he was honoured as the peculiar friend of God. Daniel relates his dream in the third person, as St. John did when speaking of himself, as that disciple whom Jesus loved. This is frequently the case with inspired men: it costs a modest man much to speak of himself.

1. In the first year of Belshazzar — For Belshazzar see Introduction, III, 3, (4). If these portions of the Daniel apocalypse represent actual events, then chaps. vii and viii must chronologically precede chap. 5. Contemporaneous records make it impossible to believe that Belshazzar ever reigned over Babylon as its supreme ruler — which fact is also suggested by verse 29 — but he may have been made co-ruler with his father, Nabonidus, as many crowned princes were before and after this date. Although this is not stated in any cuneiform documents which have so far been found, it is certain that for a number of years before his father’s death he seems to have been the real ruler of the kingdom. [See Introduction, III, 3, (4).] Daniel is here stated to have written down the “visions of his head” (compare Daniel 2:28) and to have told the sum and substance of them to others, although the book as a whole, or the interpretation of it, was to be sealed and hidden (Daniel 12;4).

V. 2. The four winds-Probably by the four winds of the great sea is signified commotions of contrary nations, striving together by wars, and producing these four beasts successively.

Verse 2. The four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea] The idea of strife is taken here from the effects that must be produced, were the east, the west, the north, and the south winds to rise tempestuously, and meet on the surface of the sea. By the great sea, the Mediterranean is meant; and is so called to distinguish it from those lakes called seas by the Hebrews; such as the Sea of Galilee, Dead Sea, Sea of Tiberias, &c.; but even that may refer to Asia, the scene of all these contentions. This dream is the same in meaning, under different emblems, as that of Nebuchadnezzar’s metallic image; but in Daniel’s dream several circumstances are added. It is supposed that Daniel had this dream about forty-eight years after Nebuchadnezzar had the vision of the great image.

Verses 2, 3. Behold, the four winds strove upon the great sea — This denotes those commotions in the world, and that troublesome state of affairs, out of which empires and kingdoms commonly take their rise. And four great beasts came up from the sea — Signifying the four great monarchies, or kingdoms, that should successively arise in the world, and have their origin from wars and commotions, which generally end in setting up the conqueror to be a great monarch over those whom he hath subdued: compare Revelation 13:1. The reason why these monarchies, which were represented to Nebuchadnezzar in the form of a great image, formed of gold and silver, brass and iron, are here exhibited by fierce and savage beasts, has been observed in the note on Daniel 2:31.

Ver. 2. The four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea; indicating that empires rose by war, commotion, and tumult. By the great sea, the Mediterranean is understood, and it is called the Mediterranean because it lies between the two continents of Europe and Africa.

2, 3. The four winds of the heaven [for the numerical symbolism see Introduction to Ezekiel, VIII] strove (literally, burst forth) upon the waters of the Mediterranean (Ezekiel 47:10) — the great international ocean of the ancients, and therefore symbolic of all the imperial powers “of the earth” (verse 17, and compare Isaiah 17; Psalm 65:7) — and out of this boiling tempest the prophet sees in vision each savage empire thrown up upon the shore (verse 4) in the form of a hideous wild beast (compare Isaiah 17:1; 29:3; 51:19; Ezekiel 17:3; 29:3; Revelation 13:1); each beast as diverse from the others as the kingdom which it represented was different. What a sublime stage and scenery for this sublimest “epic of history”!

V. 3. Four great beasts-That is, four great monarchies, great, in comparison of particular kingdoms; beasts for their tyrannical oppressions.

Verse 3. Four great beasts came up from the sea] The term sea, in Hebrew ים yam, from hmh hamah, to be tumultuous, agitated, &c., seems to be used here to point out the then known terraqueous globe, because of its generally agitated state; and the four winds striving, point out those predatory wars that prevailed almost universally among men, from the days of Nimrod, the founder of the Assyrian or Babylonish monarchy, down to that time, and in the end gave birth to the four great monarchies which are the subject of this vision.

Diverse one from another.] The people were different; the laws and customs different; and the administration of each differently executed.

Verses 2, 3. Behold, the four winds strove upon the great sea — This denotes those commotions in the world, and that troublesome state of affairs, out of which empires and kingdoms commonly take their rise. And four great beasts came up from the sea — Signifying the four great monarchies, or kingdoms, that should successively arise in the world, and have their origin from wars and commotions, which generally end in setting up the conqueror to be a great monarch over those whom he hath subdued: compare Revelation 13:1. The reason why these monarchies, which were represented to Nebuchadnezzar in the form of a great image, formed of gold and silver, brass and iron, are here exhibited by fierce and savage beasts, has been observed in the note on Daniel 2:31.

2, 3. The four winds of the heaven [for the numerical symbolism see Introduction to Ezekiel, VIII] strove (literally, burst forth) upon the waters of the Mediterranean (Ezekiel 47:10) — the great international ocean of the ancients, and therefore symbolic of all the imperial powers “of the earth” (verse 17, and compare Isaiah 17; Psalm 65:7) — and out of this boiling tempest the prophet sees in vision each savage empire thrown up upon the shore (verse 4) in the form of a hideous wild beast (compare Isaiah 17:1; 29:3; 51:19; Ezekiel 17:3; 29:3; Revelation 13:1); each beast as diverse from the others as the kingdom which it represented was different. What a sublime stage and scenery for this sublimest “epic of history”!

V. 4. The first-This was the Chaldean, or Assyrian; whose seat was first at Babylon, afterwards at Nineveh, and then at Babylon again. Eagle’s wings-They were swift, over-running many countries, and brought their monarchy to a prodigious height in a short time. The wings were plucked-Which was first done in stopping the career of their victories, and afterwards in casting them out of their kingdom. A man’s heart-They lost their lion-like courage, and became faint and cowardly like other men.

Verse 4. The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings] Bp. Newton well remarks, that these great beasts, as explained by the angel, Daniel 7:17, are kingdoms. They arise out of a stormy and tempestuous sea; that is, out of the wars and commotions of the world; and they are called great in comparison of other states and kingdoms, and are denominated beasts for their tyrannical and cruel oppression.

These four beasts are indeed monstrous productions; a lion with eagle’s wings; a bear with three ribs in its mouth; a leopard with four wings, and four heads; and a beast with ten horns. But such emblems and hieroglyphics were usual among the eastern nations, as may be seen in the monuments of antiquity. A winged lion, and such like fictitious animals, may be seen in many parts of the ruins of Persepolis. Horns are attributed to beasts which naturally have none, being used in hieroglyphic writings for symbols of strength and power. And such figures are supposed to be the symbols of different nations; and are not more strange than many that are still used in heraldry. I believe the science of heraldry arose out of the knowledge gained from the symbols used in the Sacred Writings, and the little acquaintance anciently obtained of the meaning of some of the Egyptian hieroglyphics. Hence our wiverons, griffins, unicorns, with a congeries of natural and unnatural things, split eagles, two-headed swans, &c., &c., &c.

The beast like a lion is the kingdom of the Babylonians; and the king of Babylon is compared to a lion, Jeremiah 4:7; Isaiah 5:29; and is said to fly as an eagle, Jeremiah 48:40; Ezekiel 17:3, 7. The lion is considered the king of the beasts, and the eagle the king of the birds; and therefore the kingdom of Babylon, which was signified by the golden head of the great image, was the first and noblest of all the kingdoms; and was the greatest then in being. The wings of the eagle denote the rapidity with which the lion—Nebuchadnezzar, made his conquests; for in a few years, by his own arms, he brought his empire to such an extent, and raised it to such a degree of eminence, as was truly surprising; and all tended to show with what propriety this eagle-winged lion is here made his emblem. The wings thereof were plucked] Lydia, Media, and Persia, which had been provinces of the Babylonish empire, cast off the yoke, and put themselves under kings of their own. Besides, the rapidity of its conquests was stopped by its wars with the Medes and Persians; by whom it was at last conquered, and divided between Darius the Mede and Cyrus the Persian.

And it was lifted up from the earth] That is, the wings were plucked, rendered unfit for farther flight, by which it had before been lifted up from the earth; making its conquests almost with the rapidity of an eagle’s flight. In what a short time did Nebuchadnezzar, who is here chiefly intended, conquer Syria, Phœnicia, Judea, Egypt, Arabia, &c.! But on his death the wings were plucked; and no farther extension of the empire took place under Evil-merodach or Belshazzar, till it was lost by the latter, and became divided as we have seen above.

And made stand upon the feet as a man] This I think refers to the taming of Nebuchadnezzar’s pride. He had acted like a fierce and ravening lion. God struck him with insanity; he then lived the life of a beast, and had a beast’s heart—disposition, and habits. At last God restored him. And a man’s heart was given to it] He became humane, humble, and pious; and in this state he appears to have died.

Verse 4. The first was like a lion — The Chaldean or Babylonian empire: compared to the head of gold, the chief of metals, in the image represented to Nebuchadnezzar in his dream, Daniel 2:32, 37, 38, is here represented as a lion, the king of beasts. Instead of a lion, the Vulgate, Greek, and Arabic read, a lioness, signifying, says Jerome, the cruelty of that empire, lionesses, according to naturalists, being fiercer than lions. It is represented as having eagles’ wings, to denote the extent and rapidity of its conquests, that empire being advanced to its height within a few years, by the conduct and arms of one single person, namely, Nebuchadnezzar. I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked — Or, torn out, as wtyrm may be rendered: that is, it was checked in its progress by frequent defeats, and rendered unable to make further conquests. Its wings were beginning to be plucked at the time of the delivery of this prophecy; for at this lime the Medes and Persians were encroaching upon it. Belshazzar, the king now reigning, was the last of his race; and in the seventeenth year of his reign Babylon was taken, and the kingdom transferred to the Medes and Persians. And it was lifted up from the earth — Removed from its foundation, and lost its stability: or, as some render the clause, the wings thereof were plucked, wherewith it had been lifted up from the earth, that is, had been enabled to fly swiftly, in extending its conquests; and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man’s heart was given to it — When it was thus curtailed and humbled, it became more peaceable and humane, agreeably to the idea of the psalmist, Psalm 9:20, Put them in fear, O Lord, that the nations may know themselves to be but men. The minds of the people were humbled by their misfortunes, and by the calamities coming more and more upon the empire; and they who vaunted as if they had been gods, now felt themselves to be but men.

Ver. 4. The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings. The pagan mythology often attributes wings to beasts, with a view to express a swifter motion than the animal is naturally capable of. Some versions read lioness, which is said to be fiercer than the lion: this beast refers to the Babylonian empire. Nebuchadnezzar is said to be a lion gone up from the thicket. Jeremiah 4:7. He flew as an eagle, and spread his wings over Moab. Jeremiah 48:40. His wings of empire were plucked when Cyrus conquered his provinces in the reign of Belshazzar; and God gave Nebuchadnezzar, this terrible lion, a man’s heart after his restoration from melancholy, when he acknowledged and praised the Most High.

4. All expositors refer this to the Babylonian empire, which is here represented by the king of beasts as previously by the chief of metals (Daniel 2:38). It has long been supposed that the lion was equipped with eagle’s wings to symbolize the swiftness with which he could swoop upon his prey; but it is more likely that the figure was taken from the innumerable representations in Assyria of winged lions with human faces as the symbol of imperial strength and divine authority. This royal symbol was well understood by the prophets (Jeremiah 49:19, 22; 50:17, 44). Herder suggestively remarks (1:57), “If Daniel sees a vision in which animal forms denote kingdoms, symbolic shapes of that kind must have been no strangers to his waking world; for we dream only of forms which we see when awake and in our dreams give them new and various combinations.” The wings thereof were plucked — This probably indicates a diminution in the swiftness and aggressiveness of the Babylonian invasions before the end of the empire. Although it may possibly contain an obscure reference to the account given in Daniel 4:28-36, where Nebuchadnezzar became outwardly beastly (as his whole empire had previously been), yet the cases are so dissimilar as to make even a vague reference doubtful. Most recent expositors believe that the expression and a man’s heart was given to it refers to the “humanizing of the kingdom;” although Behrmann and Thomson think, with greater probability, that it has reference to the weakening of the kingdom, since a lion’s heart has always been a symbol of strength. (Compare 2 Samuel 17:10.) Certainly this figure of a plucked beast lifted up and made to stand upon his [hind] feet, as a man, does not impress us as an attempt to convey the idea that this empire at this time was “the best of all” (Prince), having “superior intelligence” (Bevan) to all the empires which had preceded it; rather it vividly expresses the denuding of the empire of its natural and divinely granted powers and of its “lion heart,” and, in consequence of this, its defeat by the second beast, who immediately appears on the stage of action as the heir of its greatness. The battle between the lion and the bear and the latter’s victory is taken for granted.

V. 5. Another beast-The Mede’s and Persians, a fierce, ravenous creature. On one side-The north side; for the Mede first arose and sent to Cyrus the Persian to come and assist him against the Assyrian. Three ribs-Several of the Babylonian subjects revolted, and all these made the three ribs.

Verse 5. Another beast—like to a bear] This was the Medo-Persian empire, represented here under the symbol of the bear, as the largest species of these animals was found in Media, a mountainous, cold, and rough country, covered with woods. The Medes and Persians are compared to a bear on account of their cruelty and thirst after blood, a bear being a most voracious and cruel animal; the bear is termed by Aristotle an all-devouring animal; and the Medo-Persians are known to have been great robbers and spoilers. See Jeremiah 51:48-56. The Persians were notorious for the cruelty of their punishments. See Calmet. Raised up itself on one side] Cyrus arose on the borders of Chaldea, and thus the bear appeared to put itself in the position to attack the lion. It had three ribs in the mouth of it] As if it had just finished its repast on some animal that it had seized. Some think three tusks, curved like ribs, are meant; others three throats, לעינ[ illin, by which it (Cyrus) had absorbed the three empires of the Babylonians, Medes, and Persians; for these symbolic animals do not so much denote four empires, as four kings. See Daniel 7:17. Others think three row of teeth are meant to denote the triple power of the Medes, Persians, and Babylonians, conjoined. Or the east, north, and south, which were subdued by the Persians. But the ribs being between the teeth of the bear may show how Babylon, Lydia, and Egypt were ground and oppressed by the bear—the Persians; though, as ribs strengthen the body, they were a powerful support to their conquerors.

Verse 5. And behold another beast like a bear — This is the kingdom of the Medes and Persians, who, for their cruelty and greediness after blood, are compared to a bear, which is a most voracious and cruel animal. Bochart recounts several particulars wherein the Persians resembled bears; but the chief likeness consisted in what has been just mentioned, and this likeness was principally intended by the prophet, as may be inferred from the words of the text, Arise, devour much flesh. A bear, saith Aristotle, is an all-devouring animal; and so the Medo-Persians were great robbers and spoilers, according to Jeremiah 51:48, 56: see Bishop Newton and the note on Isaiah 13:18. And it raised up itself on one side — Some think the allusion is to the eastern quarter of the world, from whence the Persians came; others, to the elevation of the Persians above the Medes and Babylonians, which three powers are conceived to be meant by the three ribs in the mouth of the bear: but Sir Isaac Newton and Bishop Chandler, with great propriety, explain them as signifying the kingdoms of Babylon, Lydia, and Egypt, which were conquered by it, but were not properly parts and members of its body. They might be called ribs, as the conquest of them much strengthened the Persian empire; and they might be said to be between the teeth of the bear, as they were much grinded and oppressed by the Persians.

Ver. 5. A second, like to a bear, was next seen by Daniel. Here the Persian empire is prefigured. It was strong, rude, and voracious, as the bear. It raised up itself on one side, or it raised itself to dominion. It pushed its depredations towards the west, the north, and the south. Cyrus, in the career of his northern conquests, took Crœsus king of Lidya, and his unexampled treasures of wealth. This country was called Lidya from Lud, son of Shem. Sardis was the capital, ruined by Tamerlane, and is situate fifty six miles east of Smyrna. The Lidyan kingdom flourished two hundred and thirty years. This kingdom, with Phœnicia and Egypt, are thought to be the three ribs in the bear’s mouth.—This beast was bidden to devour much flesh. Now, though Cyrus was celebrated for his humanity, because he treated the nations with indulgence that they might join him in arms; yet the conquest of Babylon was attended with prodigious slaughter; and a more cruel race of men never reigned than the Persian kings who succeeded Cyrus.

5. For the proof that the second beast was the Medo-Persian empire see note Daniel 2:39, and 8:20. The mention here of its two sides, one of which was more active than the other, emphasizes again the duality of this empire; not its torpidity, as Terry and others maintain. (See also Daniel 8:3.) Prince — though believing that Daniel, through lack of historic knowledge, mentions a Median empire separate from the Persian empire after Nebuchadnezzar — acknowledges that ancient history establishes the closest connection between the Medes and Persians, the Greeks frequently applying the common term “Medes” indifferently to either nation (p. 116), and concludes: “It cannot of course be denied that the Medes enjoyed a special prominence in the empire. Indeed the place which they occupied in the inscriptions, next to the Persians, and the fact that Medes are found in the most important and responsible positions, seem to point to such a conclusion. Part of their powerful influence may have been due to the sacerdotal caste of the Magi, who were probably originally of Median origin. The very fact that the name Mede survived so long as almost a synonym for Persian certainly seems to show that the individuality of the older people was extremely prominent throughout a long period of the Persian history.… Throughout the entire Book of Daniel wherever both nations are mentioned the Medes have the first place, while in the Book of Esther Persia is put before Media except in Daniel 10:2, where an allusion is made to the book of the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia — perhaps an old record” (pp. 117, 121, 122). The Persians might therefore be represented by the active, and the Medes by the passive side of this beast, although its standing “on one side” may merely mean that its aggressiveness extended in one direction only (Cowles). The three ribs in the lion’s mouth show that it has been killing and devouring already. Many expositors name these ribs, which it is still crunching, as Babylonia, Egypt, and Syria; Babylonia, Assyria, and Syria; or Babylonia, Lydia, and Egypt. Three, however, was used as a round number for “several,” both in Judea and Babylonia, and this phrase probably only means that when the successor of the Babylonian empire first appeared it was already hungry for conquest and glutted with spoil.

Dr. Terry strongly maintains that the whole picture here is that of a torpid beast who holds a few ribs in his mouth and cannot be urged to further killing; but if this were the meaning there would surely be some indication given that this beast did not obey the command to “arise and devour much flesh.” Even Bevan sees that the picture, as given here, is that of a “ravenous beast… whose chief characteristic is destruction.” Thomson thinks the bear exactly represents King Cyrus, who, like the bear, came originally from the mountains, and who conquered various countries before he attacked Babylonia. The idea of the old Jewish commentators that these “three ribs” meant that the empire governed by Cyrus covered three quarters of the globe is no less contrary to all the analogies of symbolism than that of Kuenen, who thinks that its lifting itself up on one side shows that it was “threatening to fall,” while the three ribs indicate that the empire was divided into three parts, or ruled by three princes.

V. 6. Like a leopard-This leopard was the Grecian monarchy; a leopard is less than a lion, so was this monarchy at first, but yet durst fight with a lion; so did Alexander encounter Darius with an inferior force. A leopard also for his swiftness; therefore described with four wings on his back. Four heads-He was succeeded by four of his chief commanders, who divided that empire into four parts.

Verse 6. Another like a leopard—four wings—four heads] This was the Macedonian or Greek empire; and Alexander the Great its king. Alexander and his subjects are fitly compared to a leopard. 1. The leopard is remarkable for its swiftness. Alexander and the Macedonians were very rapid in their conquests. 2. The leopard is a spotted animal; a proper emblem of the various nations, with their various customs and languages, which constituted the Macedonian empire. It may refer to the character of Alexander himself, sometimes mild, at others cruel; sober and drunken; continent and lecherous; having a great power of self-government, and at other times being a slave to his passions. 3. The leopard, though small, is not afraid to attack the lion.

Four wings of a fowl] The Babylonian empire was represented with two wings; and they sufficiently marked the rapidity of Nebuchadnezzar’s conquests; but the Macedonian has here four wings; for nothing, in the history of the world, was equal to the conquests of Alexander, who ran through all the countries from Illyricum and the Adriatic Sea to the Indian Ocean and the River Ganges; and in twelve years subdued part of Europe, and all Asia.

The beast had also four heads] Signifying the empire after the death of Alexander, divided between his four generals. Cassander reigning over Macedon and Greece; Lysimachus, over Thrace and Bithynia; Ptolemy, over Egypt; and Seleucus, over Syria.

Dominion was given to it.] It was not owing to the skill, courage, or valour of Alexander and his troops, that he made those wondrous conquests; the nations were given to him. For, as Bishop Newton says, had he not been assisted by the mighty power of God, how could he, with only thirty thousand men, have overcome Darius with six hundred thousand; and in so short a time have brought the countries from Greece as far as India into subjection?

Verse 6. After this I beheld, and lo, another like a leopard — “This third kingdom is that of the Macedonians, or Grecians, who, under the command of Alexander the Great, overcame the Persians, and reigned next after them: and it is fitly compared to a leopard upon several accounts. The leopard is remarkable for swiftness, and Alexander and the Macedonians were amazingly swift and rapid in their conquests. The leopard is a spotted animal, and so was a proper emblem, according to Bochart, of the different manners of the nations which Alexander commanded; or, according to Grotius, of the various manners of Alexander himself, who was sometimes merciful, and sometimes cruel; sometimes temperate, and sometimes drunken; sometimes abstemious, and sometimes incontinent. The leopard, as Bochart observes, is of small stature, but of great courage, so as not to be afraid to engage with the lion and the larger beasts; and so Alexander, a little king, in comparison, of small stature too, and with a small army, dared to attack the king of kings, that is, Darius, whose kingdom was extended from the Ægean sea to the Indies. Which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl — The Babylonian empire was represented with two wings, but this is described with four. For, as Jerome says, nothing was swifter than the victories of Alexander, who ran through all the countries from Illyricum and the Adriatic sea to the Indian ocean and the river Ganges, not so much fighting as conquering; and in six years (he should have said in twelve) subjugated part of Europe and all Asia to himself. The beast had also four heads — To denote the four kingdoms into which this same third kingdom should be divided, as it was after the death of Alexander, among his four captains; Cassander reigning over Macedon and Greece, Lysimachus over Thrace and Bithynia, Ptolemy over Egypt, and Seleucus over Syria. And dominion was given to it — Which shows, as Jerome observes, that it was not owing to the fortitude of Alexander, but proceeded from the will of the Lord. And, indeed, unless he had been directed, preserved, and assisted by the mighty power of God, how could Alexander, with thirty thousand men, have overcome Darius with six hundred thousand, and in so short a time have brought all the countries, from Greece as far as to India, into subjection.” — Bishop Newton.

Ver. 6. I beheld, and lo, another, like a leopard. Here Alexander and the Macedonian empire are adumbrated. The Synopsis of the critics gives us here a variety of remarks. This empire, or Alexander himself, is compared to a leopard, because of his inconstancy. He was sometimes merciful, and sometimes cruel; sometimes temperate, and sometimes drunken; sometimes abstemious, and sometimes amorous. The strength, the craft, and the velocity of the animal are farther arguments of the propriety of this representation; and the leopard being spotted, might illustrate the various customs of the nations he conquered. This beast had four wings, which denote the rapidity of Alexander’s conquests. They extended from Germany to India in a few years; and Boiste adds, to a part of Spain. It had four heads; and it is very remarkable, that on his sudden death the empire was divided among his four generals. Ptolemy received Egypt; Seleucus, Syria; Antigonus, Asia minor; and Philip occupied Greece; of which Cassander had Macedonia. There were some other smaller shares of the empire, but these were the four great heads and divisions.

6. Since the second animal could not represent an independent Median empire, because, historically, there was no independent Median empire between Nebuchadnezzar and Alexander, and because Daniel himself joins together the Median and Persian law and kingdom as a unity (see note Daniel 2:39) — therefore this four-winged, four-headed leopard does not represent the Persian empire, but that of Alexander the Great (Daniel 8:21). Historically, no one doubts that the empire following that of Nebuchadnezzar was the Persian (or Medo-Persian,) whose first and greatest king was Cyrus, and that immediately following this came the empire of Alexander. There is nothing here to indicate that Daniel did not have a correct historic perspective; in which case this third empire must have been that of Alexander. The wings here, as heretofore, symbolize world-wide and rapid conquest under the protection of the gods. The four heads — corresponding to the four horns of the rough goat (Daniel 8:22), which Daniel himself declares to be the king or kingdom of Greece — would naturally represent the four kingdoms into which the empire was divided at Alexander’s death. (See, further, Daniel 8:21.) The leopard is a peculiarly swift animal, and nothing is more remarkable in the conquest of Alexander than this characteristic; since in the insignificant space of nine years he flew with his arms over the whole of Asia, and even made some parts of Europe subject to him. Some expositors have also seen in Alexander’s personal courage, variability of temper, and extreme smallness of size other peculiarities symbolized by the leopard. Cowles offers an ingenious conjecture that the four heads of the leopard are to intimate that the Grecian empire of Alexander was distinguished more by the power of thought than by brute force. Among the great kingdoms of the ancient world, this was the empire of brains. Though this interpretation seems too ingenious to be true, yet it offers another reason why Alexander’s empire could not be symbolized by the fourth beast (verse 7).

V. 7. A fourth beast-The Roman empire.

Verse 7. I saw—a fourth beast—it had great iron teeth] This is allowed, on all hands, to be the Roman empire. It was dreadful, terrible, and exceeding strong: it devoured, and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue, that is, the remains of the former kingdoms, with its feet. It reduced Macedon into a Roman province about one hundred and sixty-eight years before Christ; the kingdom of Perpamos about one hundred and thirty-three years; Syria about sixty-five; and Egypt about thirty years before Christ. And, besides the remains of the Macedonian empire, it subdued many other provinces and kingdoms; so that it might, by a very usual figure, be said to devour the whole earth, to tread it down, and break it to pieces; and became in effect, what the Roman writers delight to call it, the empire of the whole world.

It (the fourth beast) was diverse from all the beasts that were before it] Not only in its republican form of government, but also in power and greatness, extent of dominion, and length of duration. It had ten horns] The ten kingdoms into which the Roman empire was afterwards divided. Calmet says, ten Syrian kings: and he finds them thus:—1. Seleucus Nicator. 2. Antiochus Soter. 3. Antiochus Theos. 4. Antiochus Callinicus. 5. Seleucus Ceraunus. 6. Antiochus the Great. 7. Seleucus, surnamed Philopater, brother of Antiochus Epiphanes. 8. Laomedon of Mitylene, to whom Syria and Phœnicia had been intrusted. 9. Antigone. And, 10. His son Demetrius, who possessed those provinces, with the title of kings. This is too much like forced work. There are different opinions concerning these ten kings; or rather which they were that constituted this division of the Roman empire. They are reckoned thus:—1. The Roman senate. 2. The Greeks, in Ravenna. 3. The Lombards in Lombardy. 4. The Huns in Hungary. 5. The Alemans, in Germany. 6. The Franks in France. 7. The Burgundians in Burgundy.. 8. The Saracens in Africa, and a part of Spain. 9. The Goths, in other parts of Spain. 10. And the Saxons, in Britain.

Verse 7. Behold a fourth beast — This fourth kingdom can be no other than the Roman empire, which answers this emphatical description better than any of the former kingdoms. Dreadful, and terrible, and strong exceedingly — And therefore compared to iron, Daniel 2:40. It devoured and brake in pieces — It spread its arms and its terrors to a much greater extent than any of the preceding powers, and entirely subdued all the remains of the former kingdoms, and all the nations that had been subject to them. It reduced Macedon into a Roman province about one hundred and sixty-eight years, the kingdom of Pergamus about one hundred and thirty-three years, Syria about sixty-five years, and Egypt about thirty years, before Christ. And besides the remains of the Macedonian empire, it subdued many other provinces and kingdoms; so that it might, by a very usual figure, be said to devour the whole earth, to tread it down and break it in pieces; and become, in a manner, what the Roman writers delighted to call it, “The empire of the whole world.” The words of Dionysius Halicarnassus are very apposite to this subject. “The city of Rome,” says he, “ruleth over all the earth as far as it is inhabited, and commands all the sea, not only that within the Pillars of Hercules, but also the ocean, as far as it is navigable; having first and alone, of all the celebrated kingdoms, made the east and west the bounds of its empire, and its dominion hath continued longer than that of any other city or kingdom.” And it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it — This is intimated by its having no name, being more cruel and horrid than any sort of beast whatever; and the Roman power was so multiform, that it could not be pointed out by any one species of resemblance. And it was different from all kingdoms in its republican form of government, its greatness, length of duration, and extent of dominion. But its chief distinction consisted in its having ten horns, which we find at verse 24 are ten kings or kingdoms: see also Revelation 17:12. And these answer to the ten toes of the image, Daniel 2:42. The empire continued in its greatness fill the reign of Theodosius the Great, and soon afterward the partition happened, and the broken form remained, for the ten kingdoms were to be no more united, till the Ancient of days should come.

Ver. 7. After this I saw—a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly. This very strikingly applies in all its characters to the great Roman empire; and all attempts to apply it to the Turkish dominions, not only make a chasm in history, but they are ill supported by argument. Daniel was very much troubled in body and mind by this vision, and very solicitous to know the import of this fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others: ver. 15-19. It changed its form of government seven times, beginning with kings, and ending with imperial power, anarchy, and destruction. Hence this empire is not compared to any one beast by name, because it was compounded in its government and characters, and because its head branched forth into ten horns or kingdoms, among which the little horn of Antichrist arose to oppress the church.

7. Modern expositors are almost unanimous in explaining this as referring either to the Syriac-Egyptian kingdom, which filled the political horizon around the Mediterranean after the death of Alexander and his immediate successors (see Daniel 2:39; 8:20), or to these two successive dominions of Alexander and the Syrian kings regarded as a unity. We have already explained why we adhere to the former view and why the older opinion, that this fourth empire was the Roman, can no longer be maintained (Daniel 2:39). These verses, as Prince acknowledges, do not fitly describe the civilizing conquests of Alexander, but, as even Bevan sees, are “singularly inappropriate” when applied to his victories. They do, however, express precisely the Hebrew idea of the Seleucidae; and it is very suggestive that even the scholars who make Alexander the head of this empire, as Nebuchadnezzar was of the Babylonian, do not attempt to interpret these verses as actually referring to Alexander and his immediate successors, but acknowledge that the author of Daniel was really thinking of those Syrian kings who reigned several centuries after Alexander. Since secular historians without theological bias have seen that the empire founded by Alexander came to an end with the death of Perdiccas (321 B.C.), there is no reason, historically, why the author of Daniel may not be allowed to be consistent with himself when he describes the chief activity of this fourth beast as occurring not in Alexander’s era (fourth century B.C.) but in the era of Seleucus and Antiochus Epiphanes. (See particularly chap. 11.) The argument which is made so much of by opponents of this view, that the Seleucid beast-empire was not “diverse” from all that had preceded it, is easily answered by the simple statement of the acknowledged fact that from the Jewish standpoint it was exceedingly different from all that had preceded. To the Jews no rulers since the Pharaohs had seemed so “exceeding dreadful” (verse 19); whose iron teeth and brazen nails were so “exceedingly strong” to devour the Hebrew patriots, and its mighty brutish feet to stamp them into the dust. (See chap. 11.) To seek this “diversity” from all other kingdoms in some difference in its origin, or its form of government, or its constitution, or in the conquering kings’ unwillingness “to leave the subjugated people in their former barbarism,” is to strangely miss the point. Gentile history was important to the Hebrew prophet only as it touched the Hebrew nation, and the fourth Gentile kingdom was “diverse” from the others because it was more cruel and brutal in its persecution of the “saints of the Most High” (verse 25). The ten horns do not symbolize that this empire was stronger than any which had preceded it. The horns represent ten kings (verse 24).

V. 8. Another little horn-Probably either the Turk or the Romish antichrist.

Verse 8. Another little horn] Among Protestant writers this is considered to be the popedom.

Before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up] These were probably, 1. The exarchate of Ravenna. 2. The kingdom of the Lombards. And, 3. The state of Rome. The first was given to the Pope, Stephen II., by Pepin, king of France, A.D. 755; and this constituted the pope’s temporal princes. The second was given to St. Peter by Charlemagne, in 774. The third, the state of Rome, was vested in the pope, both in spirituals and temporals, and confirmed to him by Lewis the pious. These are the three horns which were plucked up from the roots before the little horn.

Were eyes like the eyes of a man] Intimating cunning and superintendence; for the pope calls himself Episcopus episcoporum, the Overseer of overseers.

And a mouth speaking great things.] Full of boasting; pretending to unlimited jurisdiction; binding and loosing at pleasure; promising to absolve from all sins, present, past, and future; and threatening to send to everlasting destruction all kings, kingdoms, and individuals, who would dare to dispute his power and authority.

Verse 8. I considered the horns — Viewed and observed them exactly, otherwise he could not have observed the little horn, whose rise was scarce discernible at first; and behold there came up among them — Much about the same time, Revelation 17:12; another little horn — Distinct from the ten horns, and of a different constitution. Some have understood by this the Turkish empire, and consider Egypt, Asia, and Greece as being the three horns torn up or reduced thereby; but the more generally received and probable opinion refers it to antichrist, or the Papal hierarchy, which rose to the height here described from very small beginnings: see on verse

24. The eyes, like human eyes, indicate the perspicacity, foresight, and cunning of this power; and the mouth speaking great, or presumptuous things, is not unlike the man of sin, described by St. Paul, “whose coming should be after the working of Satan with all deceivableness of unrighteousness,” 2 Thessalonians 2:9, 10: see also Revelation 13:5, 6.

8. This little horn and his horrible deeds will be described in detail later (verses 24, 25; chap. 11). It may be noticed, however, that it is the conduct of the king represented by this little horn which makes this fourth empire the most terrible and most hated of all. (See note verse 7.) That this king, with the boastful and blasphemous mouth (verse 25; Daniel 11:36) and “the eyes of a man” (symbolizing keen sagacity, artfulness, and spying vigilance, compare Daniel 8:23), was Antiochus Epiphanes even Zockler and Gutschmidt agree. Lagarde’s conjecture (1891), that it designated Vespasian, hardly needs confutation. Konig (Einleitung, p. 390) and others have shown how far Vespasian failed to fit the description, even if the date of the book could permit such a reference. Kamphausen well says that Lagarde’s guess is no more scientific than that of the old woman of Freiburg who in 1882 declared that this little saucy horn was no doubt the Prussian empire.

V. 9. The thrones-The kingdoms of this world were destroyed by God the king, and judge of all, called the Ancient of days, because of his eternal deity.

Verse 9. The thrones were cast down] wymd might be translated erected, so the Vulgate, positi sunt, and so all the versions; but that ours is a proper translation, is sufficiently evident from Daniel 3:6, 16, 20; 6:17, &c.; where the original word can be used in no other sense than that of throwing or casting down. There is a reference here to preparations made for a general assize, or to the convocation of the sanhedrin, where the father of the consistory sat with his assessors on each side in the form of a semicircle, and the people stood before them.

The Ancient of days] God Almighty; and this is the only place in the sacred writings where God the Father is represented in a human form.

Verses 9, 10. I beheld till the thrones were cast down — Till all these earthly kingdoms were brought to an end, and all enemies and opposite powers were destroyed. But the word wymr, here used, maybe rendered, were pitched, or placed, namely, for the reception of God, and his assessors in judgment, the saints and angels. Thus the LXX., ewv otou oi qronoi eteqhsan, till the thrones were placed, or set, or fixed; and so the Vulgate. And the verb in the text is used in the same sense in the Chaldee paraphrase on Jeremiah 1:15; where our translation reads, They shall set every one his throne, &c. The following words justify this translation; And the Ancient of days did sit — That is, the eternal Judge of the world, who has been from everlasting, who is at present, and who shall always be: and whom the prophet thus describes, to adapt himself to human apprehensions, and to make the following part of his description more intelligible; but no similitude is pointed out, nor ought we from hence to attempt to represent the invisible God by any figure. The metaphors here used, says Bishop Newton, “are borrowed from the solemnities of earthly judicatories, and particularly of the great sanhedrim of the Jews, where the father of the consistory sat, with his assessors seated on each side of him, in the form of a semicircle, with the people standing before him: and from this description again was borrowed the description of the day of judgment in the New Testament.” Whose garment was white as snow — Signifying the unspotted righteousness of his proceedings. He is elsewhere described as covering himself with light as with a garment, Psalm 104:2: see also 1 John 1:5. Kings and princes used anciently to wear white garments, as an emblem of perfect justice. And the hair of his head like the pure wool — To denote the eternity and maturity of his counsels, and that his decisions are all perfectly right and true, without the least mixture of any partial affections. His throne was like the fiery flame — Denoting his awful majesty, and the severity of his judgments on the ungodly; and his wheels of burning fire — Emblematical of the revolutions and dispensations of his providence, Ezekiel 1:15, being dreadfully severe and destructive to the wicked. The reader will observe, God’s throne is here described in the nature of a triumphal chariot, supported by angels as so many fiery wheels. Grotius remarks, that the ancient thrones and sellæ curules had wheels. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him — Signifying his justice and wrath in giving forth and executing sentence against the ungodly. Thousand thousands ministered unto him — His retinue was an innumerable company of angels; and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him — To receive their sentence from his lips. The judgment was set — That is, the court, namely, God the supreme judge, and the saints as his assessors, made their public appearance. And the books were opened — That is, “those evidences which contained the laws and will of God, whether natural or revealed; those in which the actions of men, with all their circumstances of aggravation or extenuation were recorded; those from which the clearest and completest conviction might be adduced, in order to render the judgment such as that all should be obliged to acknowledge it to be the result of the most perfect truth and consummate justice: see Revelation 20:12.” — Wintle.

Ver. 9. I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit. Theodotian reads, “I beheld till thrones were placed or erected, and the Ancient of days did sit.” Many versions read the same, and it best agrees with Revelation 20:4. I saw thrones, and they sat upon them. The text is quoted both ways by the fathers.

The Ancient of days. This may apply to God the Father; but the word Father implies Son and Spirit, existing before all time; yet the Father is here named because it would be less eligible for the Son to be judge in his own cause against antichrist. The supreme Ruler is compared to an earthly judge advanced in age. But is it not an infinite derogation to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, to be likened to angels or men? Must not then the vehicles of vision, which the infinitely condescending God assumed for the sake of conversing with man, be intimations and shadows of the incarnate Messiah? If not, do not all such representations deceive us; for the infinite perfections of God cannot be represented by any creature. His garment and his hair were perfectly white, which is figurative of the spotless sanctity of the Judge. The flames of fire which issue from his presence, mark his indignation against the bloody beasts, and the cruel antichrist; while the fiery wheels of his chariot equally indicate the universal extent of his providence.

9. Thrones were cast down — Literally, thrones were placed. This “Ancient of the Day” (Meinhold) is a new name for Jehovah, expressing the well-recognized idea of his eternity (Psalm 90:2; 93:2), while the color of his hair and garments symbolizes the purity and holiness of the Judge who lives in light and who is enthroned upon cycles of flame. (Compare, especially notes, Ezekiel 1 and 10; Psalm 18:9-14.)

Verse 10. A fiery stream issued] This is not spoken of the final judgment; but of that which he was to execute upon this fourth beast, the Roman empire; and the little boasting horn, which is a part of the fourth beast, and must fall when the other falls.

Verses 9, 10. I beheld till the thrones were cast down — Till all these earthly kingdoms were brought to an end, and all enemies and opposite powers were destroyed. But the word wymr, here used, maybe rendered, were pitched, or placed, namely, for the reception of God, and his assessors in judgment, the saints and angels. Thus the LXX., ewv otou oi qronoi eteqhsan, till the thrones were placed, or set, or fixed; and so the Vulgate. And the verb in the text is used in the same sense in the Chaldee paraphrase on Jeremiah 1:15; where our translation reads, They shall set every one his throne, &c. The following words justify this translation; And the Ancient of days did sit — That is, the eternal Judge of the world, who has been from everlasting, who is at present, and who shall always be: and whom the prophet thus describes, to adapt himself to human apprehensions, and to make the following part of his description more intelligible; but no similitude is pointed out, nor ought we from hence to attempt to represent the invisible God by any figure. The metaphors here used, says Bishop Newton, “are borrowed from the solemnities of earthly judicatories, and particularly of the great sanhedrim of the Jews, where the father of the consistory sat, with his assessors seated on each side of him, in the form of a semicircle, with the people standing before him: and from this description again was borrowed the description of the day of judgment in the New Testament.” Whose garment was white as snow — Signifying the unspotted righteousness of his proceedings. He is elsewhere described as covering himself with light as with a garment, Psalm 104:2: see also 1 John 1:5. Kings and princes used anciently to wear white garments, as an emblem of perfect justice. And the hair of his head like the pure wool — To denote the eternity and maturity of his counsels, and that his decisions are all perfectly right and true, without the least mixture of any partial affections. His throne was like the fiery flame — Denoting his awful majesty, and the severity of his judgments on the ungodly; and his wheels of burning fire — Emblematical of the revolutions and dispensations of his providence, Ezekiel 1:15, being dreadfully severe and destructive to the wicked. The reader will observe, God’s throne is here described in the nature of a triumphal chariot, supported by angels as so many fiery wheels. Grotius remarks, that the ancient thrones and sellæ curules had wheels. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him — Signifying his justice and wrath in giving forth and executing sentence against the ungodly. Thousand thousands ministered unto him — His retinue was an innumerable company of angels; and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him — To receive their sentence from his lips. The judgment was set — That is, the court, namely, God the supreme judge, and the saints as his assessors, made their public appearance. And the books were opened — That is, “those evidences which contained the laws and will of God, whether natural or revealed; those in which the actions of men, with all their circumstances of aggravation or extenuation were recorded; those from which the clearest and completest conviction might be adduced, in order to render the judgment such as that all should be obliged to acknowledge it to be the result of the most perfect truth and consummate justice: see Revelation 20:12.” — Wintle.

Ver. 10. A fiery stream issued before him. This illustrates the terrors of his vengeance.—Thousand thousands ministered unto him. This is a certain number for an uncertain. These are the apostles, saints and angels, no doubt, who sit on heavenly thrones to judge the world, and to direct the storms of vengeance on the guilty nations; and on antichrist in particular, as in the note on Isaiah 11. But the text may justly be applied to the general judgment of the world at the last day, as well as to partial judgments of particular nations. This seems fully implied in the opening of the books. God has long opened the book of the gospel, the mystery of his holy will, and he will shortly open the book of conscience, and the books of life and death, which figure fully assures us that nothing can be hid from his eyes. And the books were opened.

He saw the judge with fiery looks,

And bolts of vengeance hurled;

And all the wide-extended books,

Indictments of a world.

10. This vision of Jehovah’s judgment seat is worthy of Ezekiel. (See Ezekiel 1 and 10). The dreamer cannot count the angelic hosts which stand by the thousand thousands in humble obedience before Him as “the judgment is set” (or, “the assize is begun”). It was no new idea that all the deeds of men were recorded by a heavenly scribe. This appears in the Egyptian records centuries before the era of Moses or Joseph, and was an early belief among the Hebrews (Exodus 12:1; 32:32; Isaiah 4:3; Malachi 3:16; compare Revelation 20:12). The Old Testament generally emphasizes the fact that there is a “book of life” in which the names and sufferings of the pious are recorded; but in this passage it is the sins of evil empires, and especially the blasphemies of the “little horn” which the open book reveals. Thomson says: “We are not to regard this as the final judgment. Daniel is, rather, admitted into the presence of God in the heavens and sees his judgment being continually prepared against the wicked.”

V. 11. Destroyed-This cannot but be meant of the ruin and judgment of antichrist.

Verse 11. I beheld then because of the voice (or, the beast will be destroyed because) of the great words which the horn spake—his body destroyed] When the dominion was taken from the rest of the beasts, their bodies were not destroyed, but suffered to continue still in being; but when the dominion shall be taken away from this beast, his body shall be totally destroyed; because other kingdoms succeeded to those, but no other earthly kingdom shall succeed to this.—Bishop Newton.

Verses 11, 12. I beheld then — Chaldee, tywh hzj, I was attentive, spectabam attentus, I beheld attentively, as Grotius renders it; because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake — See on verse 25. I was desirous of knowing, and looked carefully to see what would be the end of this matter, more particularly on account of the arrogant and boasting words which the horn spake. I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed — This signified, that no other earthly kingdom should succeed to this, but that when an entire end should be put to it, and the ten kingdoms included in it, then the kingdom of Christ should succeed, as is more fully set forth toward the end of this chapter. We may observe, that it is not only said of this fourth beast, that he was slain, but that his body was destroyed and given to the burning flame; that is, made entirely extinct, as every thing is that is burned in the fire; whereas it is said, concerning the rest of the beasts, that though they had their dominion taken away, their lives were prolonged for a season and time. Their bodies were not destroyed, as that of the fourth beast, but they were suffered to continue still in being; that is, other kingdoms of the same nature, though different in some particulars, succeeded to them. The destruction of the beast, it must be observed, will be the destruction of the horn also, and consequently the horn is a part of the fourth beast, or of the Roman empire.

11. The crimes of the beast (the Syrian empire, verse 7) having been revealed from the open book, the divine judgment of death by fire is pronounced. The burning of the beast is because of the blasphemies of the little horn. “The punishment among the Babylonians was burning.” — Thomson. This symbolism is elaborated by a later and greater apocalyptist (Revelation 19:20).

Verses 11, 12. I beheld then — Chaldee, tywh hzj, I was attentive, spectabam attentus, I beheld attentively, as Grotius renders it; because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake — See on verse 25. I was desirous of knowing, and looked carefully to see what would be the end of this matter, more particularly on account of the arrogant and boasting words which the horn spake. I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed — This signified, that no other earthly kingdom should succeed to this, but that when an entire end should be put to it, and the ten kingdoms included in it, then the kingdom of Christ should succeed, as is more fully set forth toward the end of this chapter. We may observe, that it is not only said of this fourth beast, that he was slain, but that his body was destroyed and given to the burning flame; that is, made entirely extinct, as every thing is that is burned in the fire; whereas it is said, concerning the rest of the beasts, that though they had their dominion taken away, their lives were prolonged for a season and time. Their bodies were not destroyed, as that of the fourth beast, but they were suffered to continue still in being; that is, other kingdoms of the same nature, though different in some particulars, succeeded to them. The destruction of the beast, it must be observed, will be the destruction of the horn also, and consequently the horn is a part of the fourth beast, or of the Roman empire.

12. The prophet sees that while all the beasts had been destroyed really by divine fire, the destruction of the fourth beastly kingdom (the Syrian) was much quicker and more complete than the others.

V. 13. A son of man-That is, the Messiah, he came with the clouds of heaven, gloriously, swiftly and terribly. And came-This relates to his ascension, at which time, he received his royal investiture, for the protection of his church, and curbing of their enemies.

Verse 13. One like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven] This most certainly points out the Lord Jesus, vna rb bar enosh, the Son of miserable man; who took our nature upon him that he might redeem us unto himself. To prove himself to be the Messiah he applies, before the high priests, these words of the Prophet Daniel to himself Matthew 24:30.

Near before him.] The Ancient of days.

Verse 13. I saw in the night visions, &c. — Here is described by what means these changes were to be brought about; behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven — One in the shape and likeness of a man, but clothed with such ensigns of majesty and honour, (signified here by the clouds of heaven,) as showed him to be an extraordinary person, (compare Revelation 1:13, and 14:14,) indeed no less than the Messiah, as the following description of him declares. As the two foregoing verses declare why the fourth beast was destroyed, this part of the vision shows by whom it was done; setting Christ forth in his judicial capacity, and describing him by that title, which, in allusion to this place, he often gave himself, namely, the Son of man. He particularly alludes to this text, Matthew 26:64, where he speaks of his coming in the clouds of heaven; by which expression he acknowledged himself to be the true Messiah here described, and gave a direct answer to the question there proposed to him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the blessed? Compare Mark 14:61, 62; Revelation 1:7. Whereupon they condemned him as guilty of blasphemy. A learned prelate, in his Defence of Christianity from the ancient Prophecies, p. 131, observes, that ynn[, anani, the clouds, was a known name of the Messiah among the Jewish writers, which shows that they understood this text as spoken of him.

Ver. 13. One like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven. Dr. Lightfoot, on John 5:27, has the following note. “And there was given unto him dominion and glory, to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. This illustrious person, says rabbi Solomon, is the king, the Messiah. He is followed by rabbi Saadias, wnyqdx hycm hz zoh Messiah, zidkenoo; this is Messiah our righteousness.” These two quotations, making all due concessions to the circumscribed knowledge of the rabbins respecting the Messiah, are strong refutations of the socinian reading and glosses of Dr. Blaney on Jeremiah 23:6. Our Saviour applies this text to himself in Matthew 24:30. Of the three names given to man in the Hebrew scriptures, Adam, Ish, and Enosh, the last is proper here, to designate the Redeemer, as clothed with our infirmities. But when he appeared as Lord of the fiery elements, the form of the fourth is said to be like the Son of God: Daniel 3:25.

13. The Son of man — Rather, “a son of man” (R.V.). There has been much discussion whether this refers to the coming of a personal Messiah or is merely a personification of the “saints of the Most High” (verses 18, 22, 27). It is agreed that it must refer either to the Messianic King or to the Messianic kingdom personified. Kuenen argues that the personal application, “although capable of being reconciled with the author’s own words,” yet is not necessitated or “recommended” by them. It was the Israelitish nation which was to be crowned with everlasting dominion (verse 14). The Israelite appears in the vision in human form, in contrast with the brutish heathen kings previously seen, and the prophecy only means that the human kingdom of God shall supersede the kingdom of the beasts (Prophecy and Prophets in Israel, pp. 223, 224, 529, 531). This view is substantially adopted even by evangelical and conservative scholars such as Konig and Stanton. Behrmann, however, shows that a personal Messiah was understood here by all expositors down to Aben Ezra, and urges the point that if the little horn is an individual, the one “like a Son of man” must be an individual also. (Compare Briggs, Messianic Prophecy.) Various Jewish rabbis, though the view was not universal, spoke in the same way of the Messiah as a person previous to the coming of Christ. (See Hebraica, 4:179.) Notwithstanding the objections of Lietzmann, Konig, and Wellhausen, the passages in the Book of Enoch which speak of the personal Messiah in Danielic phraseology seem certainly early and certainly Jewish; though later Jewish rabbis (through antipathy to the Christian interpretation) actually sought to make this passage (and Daniel 7:8; 11:37) a polemic against Christianity! Even the LXX. translated the “branch” (Psalm 80:15, Hebrews) as “Son of man,” and the Targum gives as a synonym for this term “the King Messiah” (Eb. Nestle). Even if some of these passages in the Book of Enoch, etc., be late, yet the interpretation must have been early, for it certainly would not have been originated by the rabbis after the Christian argument for Christ’s Messiahship had been promulgated. “Son of man” in Aramaic does not necessarily mean simply “man” or “a man,” as has been proved by Professor Dalman (Die Worte Jesu, 1898). The Gospel writers do not use this term as a synonym for man — which proves that Jesus himself in his original speech also made this distinction. It was felt then, as we feel now, that, while we are “children of men,” there could be but one such Son of man (Gess, Die Inspiration, p. 357). It is certain, as Professor Dalman shows, that, although some of the hearers of Christ may have misunderstood the reference, Jesus himself did mean by his use of the term “Son of man” to claim that he was destined to be the ruler of the world, and that in him the vision of Daniel was being fulfilled. Although “Son of man” was not universally considered a Messianic title — otherwise Jesus could not have been using this term freely while at the same time wishing to postpone the public announcement of his Messiahship (Matthew 16:13, 16) — yet when he did plainly declare that he himself was the Son of man of whom Daniel spoke he was at once condemned to death as a pretender to Messianic honors. It was entirely in accordance with the method of our Lord that he should select for himself a title which to the ordinary hearer might only emphasize his humanity — the evangelists never report any hearer or disciple using this title in addressing our Lord, which shows that it was not a recognized title of honor — but which when explained to his select few in the last days of his life, and later upon the witness stand, would open out with a new deep meaning (Matthew 24:23-30; 26:64, 65). As a man of vision has said, Jesus, by his emphasis and underscoring of this prophetic name, not only dignified our humanity, as he thus completely identified himself with the race, but “he stepped up at once to David’s vacant throne, and gathering up the scattered lights of prophecy he drew them as a rainbow about himself. He is the Son of man among men, but separated by infinite distances from all other sons of men” (R.W. Dale, Expositor, November, 1896). Professor Schmidt, of Cornell University, has just made the suggestion that Michael, the guardian angel of Israel, was meant by this “one like a son of man.” Dr. Terry had formerly suggested that this Son of man was identical with the Messianic Prince of Daniel 9:25, 26, who was presented also again in Daniel 10:21; 12:1 (on which see notes), under the symbolical name of Michael. It rather seems to the present writer that this “one like unto a son of man” is to be explained by Ezekiel’s reference to “the likeness as the appearance of a man” which he saw on Jehovah’s throne. (See notes on Ezekiel 1:26-28.) While the kings of the beast kingdoms came up from the sea, this King of saints comes like Jehovah in the storm and in the clouds (Ezekiel 1:28; Isaiah 19:1; Psalm 18:9-11). Rabbi Joshua ben Levi explains, “If they be worthy, he [the Messiah] will come with the clouds of heaven; if not, he will come lowly, and riding upon an ass” (Sanhedrim, fol. 98, col. 1). Saadia interprets, “He comes in humility, riding upon an ass (Zechariah 9:9), yet with the clouds of heaven, that is, with the angels of the heavenly hosts, which is the great glory which the Creator will give the Messiah.” (See Hebraica, 4:179, etc.)

Verse 14. And there was given him dominion] This also is applied to our Lord Jesus by himself, after his resurrection, Matthew 28:18. His dominion is an everlasting dominion] Christianity shall increase, and prevail to the end of the world. See the parallel passages in the margin.

Verse 14. There was given him dominion, &c. — “All these kingdoms shall in their turns be destroyed, but the kingdom of the Messiah shall stand for ever. It was in allusion to this prophecy that the angel said of Jesus, before he was conceived in the womb, Luke 1:33, He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end. After what manner these great changes will be effected, we cannot pretend to say, as God hath not been pleased to reveal it. We see the remains of the ten horns which arose out of the Roman empire. We see the little horn still subsisting, though not in full strength and vigour, but as we hope upon the decline, and tending toward a dissolution. And having seen so many of these particulars accomplished, we can have no reason to doubt that the rest also will be fulfilled in due season; though we cannot frame any conception how Christ will be manifested in glory; how the little horn, with the body of the fourth beast, will be given to the burning flame; or how the saints will take the kingdom, and possess it for ever and ever. It is the nature of such prophecies, not to be perfectly understood till they are fulfilled. The best comment upon them will be their completion.” — Bishop Newton.

14. This prophecy could never be fulfilled by any merely Jewish king or Jewish nation. These are the same expressions used of the kingdom of Daniel’s God (Daniel 2:44; 4:3, 34; 6:26). He who has the appearance as the likeness of a man (Ezekiel 1:26) is now seen coming in the cloud chariot of Jehovah to take rule over the world. Dr. Terry says: “His receiving dominion and glory and a kingdom is explained in John 5:22, 27, ‘The Father hath given all judgment unto the Son, and he gave him authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of man;’ so too in Matthew 28:18, ‘There has been given to me all authority in heaven and upon earth.’” It is not to be supposed that the Christian era lay open before the author of Daniel and that he saw Jesus when he uttered these words. The prophets often spake more wisely than they knew. That this prophecy refers to Christ’s first coming to set up the New Testament “kingdom of heaven,” and not to his inauguration as King after the universal Resurrection and General Judgment, Professor Cowles has satisfactorily and thoroughly established.

Verse 15. I Daniel was grieved, &c.] The words in the original are uncommonly emphatic. My spirit was grieved, or sickened, hndn wgb bego nidneh, within its sheath or scabbard. Which I think proves, 1. That the human spirit is different from the body. 2. That it has a proper subsistence independently of the body, which is only its sheath for a certain time. 3. That the spirit may exist independently of its body, as the sword does independently of its sheath.

Verses 15-18. I Daniel was grieved in my spirit — Upon account of the extraordinary changes which seemed to be signified by the vision, the particulars of which troubled me, though I had not a perfect apprehension of their meaning. I came near unto one of them that stood by — Namely, to one of the angels who were attending as ministering spirits. And asked him the truth, &c. — Desired him to give me a clear understanding of all this. So he told me, &c. — Explained to me the true and plain meaning of these things. These great beasts are four kings — Four kingdoms, or monarchies. So the word king is used Isaiah 23:15. Which shall arise out of the earth — Which shall raise themselves merely upon carnal, worldly grounds and considerations, and that by wars and troubles, and which shall think of and concern themselves with only earthly things; whereas the kingdom of Christ is described, in the next verse, as a heavenly, spiritual kingdom, fitting men for heaven. But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom — When the earthly kingdom shall be destroyed, the heavenly, or spiritual kingdom of the saints shall commence; they shall enter upon it on earth, but shall retain it in heaven for ever. The Chaldee word ˆynwyl[, rendered Most High, is literally high ones, as it is translated in the margin: and these saints are indeed high ones, being children and heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ. Sometimes, however, the one true God is spoken of in the plural number by way of eminence, as Joshua 24:19, where it is in the Hebrew, He is the holy Gods. The expression may therefore mean as we have it rendered.

15, 16. Daniel being unable to understand the vision asks one of Jehovah’s attendants (verse 10) to explain it to him. Marti, by a slight change of text, reads, “on account of that” instead of in the midst of my body (verse 15).

V. 16. Unto one-That is, to an angel, that ministered. The truth-The true meaning of this vision.

Verses 15-18. I Daniel was grieved in my spirit — Upon account of the extraordinary changes which seemed to be signified by the vision, the particulars of which troubled me, though I had not a perfect apprehension of their meaning. I came near unto one of them that stood by — Namely, to one of the angels who were attending as ministering spirits. And asked him the truth, &c. — Desired him to give me a clear understanding of all this. So he told me, &c. — Explained to me the true and plain meaning of these things. These great beasts are four kings — Four kingdoms, or monarchies. So the word king is used Isaiah 23:15. Which shall arise out of the earth — Which shall raise themselves merely upon carnal, worldly grounds and considerations, and that by wars and troubles, and which shall think of and concern themselves with only earthly things; whereas the kingdom of Christ is described, in the next verse, as a heavenly, spiritual kingdom, fitting men for heaven. But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom — When the earthly kingdom shall be destroyed, the heavenly, or spiritual kingdom of the saints shall commence; they shall enter upon it on earth, but shall retain it in heaven for ever. The Chaldee word ˆynwyl[, rendered Most High, is literally high ones, as it is translated in the margin: and these saints are indeed high ones, being children and heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ. Sometimes, however, the one true God is spoken of in the plural number by way of eminence, as Joshua 24:19, where it is in the Hebrew, He is the holy Gods. The expression may therefore mean as we have it rendered.

15, 16. Daniel being unable to understand the vision asks one of Jehovah’s attendants (verse 10) to explain it to him. Marti, by a slight change of text, reads, “on account of that” instead of in the midst of my body (verse 15).

Verse 17. These great beasts—are four kings] See the preceding verses, where the following explanations are inserted and illustrated.

Verses 15-18. I Daniel was grieved in my spirit — Upon account of the extraordinary changes which seemed to be signified by the vision, the particulars of which troubled me, though I had not a perfect apprehension of their meaning. I came near unto one of them that stood by — Namely, to one of the angels who were attending as ministering spirits. And asked him the truth, &c. — Desired him to give me a clear understanding of all this. So he told me, &c. — Explained to me the true and plain meaning of these things. These great beasts are four kings — Four kingdoms, or monarchies. So the word king is used Isaiah 23:15. Which shall arise out of the earth — Which shall raise themselves merely upon carnal, worldly grounds and considerations, and that by wars and troubles, and which shall think of and concern themselves with only earthly things; whereas the kingdom of Christ is described, in the next verse, as a heavenly, spiritual kingdom, fitting men for heaven. But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom — When the earthly kingdom shall be destroyed, the heavenly, or spiritual kingdom of the saints shall commence; they shall enter upon it on earth, but shall retain it in heaven for ever. The Chaldee word ˆynwyl[, rendered Most High, is literally high ones, as it is translated in the margin: and these saints are indeed high ones, being children and heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ. Sometimes, however, the one true God is spoken of in the plural number by way of eminence, as Joshua 24:19, where it is in the Hebrew, He is the holy Gods. The expression may therefore mean as we have it rendered.

17, 18. The four beasts symbolize four kings (or, rather, kingdoms, verse 23), at the end of whose brutal rule the kingdom of the saints, ruled over by “one like unto a son of man,” shall take the sovereignty. “As Michael, ‘the great prince,’ is not identical with the people of God (Daniel 10:21; 12:1), but is rather their representative and defender, so here it seems most satisfactory to understand the Son of man (verse 13) as the personal representative and Prince of the people of the saints (verse 27).” — Terry. So the saints of Christ shall reign with him in glory (Romans 8:17; 2 Timothy 2:12; Matthew 19:28; Revelation 2:26, 27, etc.).

V. 18. But the saints-Jesus Christ being their king, they shall reign with him, and possess the kingdom for ever.

Verse 18. But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom] I doubt whether this be the true sense of the original Chaldee, ˆwnwyl[ yvdq atwklm ˆwlbqyw vikabbelun malcutha kaddishey elyonin, “But the supreme holy ones shall receive the kingdom;” or, “they shall receive the kingdom of the supreme saints.” Properly translated by Montanus, Et suscipient regnum sanctorum altissimorum. Whatever we may think of the patriarchs and the Jews in their best times, there has never been so much holiness of heart possessed, and so much righteousness practised, as by the genuine disciples of Christ. Christianity alone has provided a full redemption for man. They are the chief saints, and to them God gives the kingdom: and this Gospel dispensation, called often the kingdom of God, and the kingdom of heaven, shall last for ever, during the whole lapse of time; and for ever and ever-throughout eternity, shall they and its blessings endure.

Verses 15-18. I Daniel was grieved in my spirit — Upon account of the extraordinary changes which seemed to be signified by the vision, the particulars of which troubled me, though I had not a perfect apprehension of their meaning. I came near unto one of them that stood by — Namely, to one of the angels who were attending as ministering spirits. And asked him the truth, &c. — Desired him to give me a clear understanding of all this. So he told me, &c. — Explained to me the true and plain meaning of these things. These great beasts are four kings — Four kingdoms, or monarchies. So the word king is used Isaiah 23:15. Which shall arise out of the earth — Which shall raise themselves merely upon carnal, worldly grounds and considerations, and that by wars and troubles, and which shall think of and concern themselves with only earthly things; whereas the kingdom of Christ is described, in the next verse, as a heavenly, spiritual kingdom, fitting men for heaven. But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom — When the earthly kingdom shall be destroyed, the heavenly, or spiritual kingdom of the saints shall commence; they shall enter upon it on earth, but shall retain it in heaven for ever. The Chaldee word ˆynwyl[, rendered Most High, is literally high ones, as it is translated in the margin: and these saints are indeed high ones, being children and heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ. Sometimes, however, the one true God is spoken of in the plural number by way of eminence, as Joshua 24:19, where it is in the Hebrew, He is the holy Gods. The expression may therefore mean as we have it rendered.

17, 18. The four beasts symbolize four kings (or, rather, kingdoms, verse 23), at the end of whose brutal rule the kingdom of the saints, ruled over by “one like unto a son of man,” shall take the sovereignty. “As Michael, ‘the great prince,’ is not identical with the people of God (Daniel 10:21; 12:1), but is rather their representative and defender, so here it seems most satisfactory to understand the Son of man (verse 13) as the personal representative and Prince of the people of the saints (verse 27).” — Terry. So the saints of Christ shall reign with him in glory (Romans 8:17; 2 Timothy 2:12; Matthew 19:28; Revelation 2:26, 27, etc.).

Verse 19. His nails of brass] This is not mentioned in the seventh verse, where the description of the beast is given. It might be added, for the first time, by the person who is now explaining the fourth beast. Houbigant thinks it has been lost out of the text: but such loss is not intimated by any MS.; nor does any of the ancient Versions acknowledge this addition in the seventh verse.

Verses 19-22. Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast — Namely, what was intended to be signified by it. And of the ten horns that were in his head — Of what they were emblems; and of the other which came up, &c. — See verse 8; whose look was more stout than his fellows — Or more great and magnificent; or, who was more arrogant, and claimed a superiority over the rest: for though this horn, or power, was small at first, it at length exceeded all other powers in pomp and pre-eminence, exalting itself not only above all temporal authorities, but above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, 2 Thessalonians 2:4. I beheld — Chaldee, I was seeing, or considering attentively; and the same horn made war with the saints — By the saints here is to be understood the servants of Christ. So antichrist is described as making war with the saints, and overcoming them for a time: see the margin. Until the Ancient of days came — To vindicate their cause, to crush the idolaters, and to extirpate the dominion of antichrist: or until the final judgment, when the saints shall sit as assessors with Christ, shall be seated on thrones, and reign as kings and priests with God and Christ, and possess the kingdom for ever. And judgment was given to the saints, &c. — Power to judge and rule over their enemies. And the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom — See on verse 14.

Ver. 19, 20. Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast—and of the ten horns. The Roman empire was divided into about ten kingdoms, which are reckoned by bishop Lloyd in the following manner.

(1) The Huns formed their kingdom about the year of Christ 356.

(2) The Ostrogoths in 377.

(3) The Wisigoths in 378.

(4) The Franks in 407.

(5) the Vandals in 407.

(6) The Sueves and Alans in 407.

(7) The Burgundians in 407.

(8) The Herules and Rugians in 476.

(9) The Saxons in 476.

(10) The Longobards in Hungary in 526.—

But Daniel wished to know the meaning of the other little horn which came up, and before whom three kings fell. Protestant critics apply this to the pope or bishop of Rome, who subdued the dukes in the neighbourhood of Rome; the state of Ravenna, governed by an exarchate or viceroy to the emperor of Constantinople; and the kingdom of the Lombards. This is the horn which spake great swelling words, and made war with the saints. And as Antiochus Epiphanes oppressed the Jews for three years and a half, so this Man of sin, or wicked one, was to oppress the church for twelve hundred and sixty years, which reckoning a day for a year, as the scriptures often do, is expressed by the time, one year; times, two years; and the half time, six months. Thus Antiochus is a figure of this Antichrist, as may be seen at large in the works of Mr. Mede, Dr. More, and bishop Newton.

19-22. See the interpretation of this vision, verses 23-25; also notes verses 7, 8. Given to the saints (verse 22) — Or, done unto the saints.

Verses 19-22. Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast — Namely, what was intended to be signified by it. And of the ten horns that were in his head — Of what they were emblems; and of the other which came up, &c. — See verse 8; whose look was more stout than his fellows — Or more great and magnificent; or, who was more arrogant, and claimed a superiority over the rest: for though this horn, or power, was small at first, it at length exceeded all other powers in pomp and pre-eminence, exalting itself not only above all temporal authorities, but above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, 2 Thessalonians 2:4. I beheld — Chaldee, I was seeing, or considering attentively; and the same horn made war with the saints — By the saints here is to be understood the servants of Christ. So antichrist is described as making war with the saints, and overcoming them for a time: see the margin. Until the Ancient of days came — To vindicate their cause, to crush the idolaters, and to extirpate the dominion of antichrist: or until the final judgment, when the saints shall sit as assessors with Christ, shall be seated on thrones, and reign as kings and priests with God and Christ, and possess the kingdom for ever. And judgment was given to the saints, &c. — Power to judge and rule over their enemies. And the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom — See on verse 14.

Ver. 19, 20. Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast—and of the ten horns. The Roman empire was divided into about ten kingdoms, which are reckoned by bishop Lloyd in the following manner.

(1) The Huns formed their kingdom about the year of Christ 356.

(2) The Ostrogoths in 377.

(3) The Wisigoths in 378.

(4) The Franks in 407.

(5) the Vandals in 407.

(6) The Sueves and Alans in 407.

(7) The Burgundians in 407.

(8) The Herules and Rugians in 476.

(9) The Saxons in 476.

(10) The Longobards in Hungary in 526.—

But Daniel wished to know the meaning of the other little horn which came up, and before whom three kings fell. Protestant critics apply this to the pope or bishop of Rome, who subdued the dukes in the neighbourhood of Rome; the state of Ravenna, governed by an exarchate or viceroy to the emperor of Constantinople; and the kingdom of the Lombards. This is the horn which spake great swelling words, and made war with the saints. And as Antiochus Epiphanes oppressed the Jews for three years and a half, so this Man of sin, or wicked one, was to oppress the church for twelve hundred and sixty years, which reckoning a day for a year, as the scriptures often do, is expressed by the time, one year; times, two years; and the half time, six months. Thus Antiochus is a figure of this Antichrist, as may be seen at large in the works of Mr. Mede, Dr. More, and bishop Newton.

19-22. See the interpretation of this vision, verses 23-25; also notes verses 7, 8. Given to the saints (verse 22) — Or, done unto the saints.

Verse 21. The same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them.] Those who make Antiochus the little horn, make the saints the Jewish people. Those who understand the popedom by it, see this as referring to the cruel persecutions of the popes of Rome against the Waldenses and Albigenses, and the Protestant Church in general.

Verses 19-22. Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast — Namely, what was intended to be signified by it. And of the ten horns that were in his head — Of what they were emblems; and of the other which came up, &c. — See verse 8; whose look was more stout than his fellows — Or more great and magnificent; or, who was more arrogant, and claimed a superiority over the rest: for though this horn, or power, was small at first, it at length exceeded all other powers in pomp and pre-eminence, exalting itself not only above all temporal authorities, but above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, 2 Thessalonians 2:4. I beheld — Chaldee, I was seeing, or considering attentively; and the same horn made war with the saints — By the saints here is to be understood the servants of Christ. So antichrist is described as making war with the saints, and overcoming them for a time: see the margin. Until the Ancient of days came — To vindicate their cause, to crush the idolaters, and to extirpate the dominion of antichrist: or until the final judgment, when the saints shall sit as assessors with Christ, shall be seated on thrones, and reign as kings and priests with God and Christ, and possess the kingdom for ever. And judgment was given to the saints, &c. — Power to judge and rule over their enemies. And the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom — See on verse 14.

Ver. 21. The same horn (the little horn) made war with the saints. This is the horn of civil power which sprung up among the ten kingdoms, contemptible in its growth, but not inferior in cruelty to the other succession of beasts. The application of this horn to the tyranny of Rome has been uniform since the days of Peter Valdo, the great reformer in the south of France, towards the close of the eleventh century. Millions of christians, it is horrifying to assert, have perished beneath that horn of power. The council of Trent has decreed, “that without subjection to the church of the Romans, no human creature can be saved.” See more on chap. 8.

In Spain, the fifth council of Toledo, canon 3., speaks thus. “We the holy council promulge this sentence, pleasing to God, that whoever hereafter shall succeed to the throne, shall not ascend till he has sworn not to permit any man to live in his kingdom, who is not a catholic. And if after taking the reins of government he shall violate his oath, let him become anathema maranatha in the sight of God, and be fuel for eternal fire.” See Matthew Sutcliffe, Dean of Exeter’s challenge, 4to. anno 1602 and 1606. How then can protestants admit Rome into their bosom till those decrees are disavowed? Is our life safe in their hands?

19-22. See the interpretation of this vision, verses 23-25; also notes verses 7, 8. Given to the saints (verse 22) — Or, done unto the saints.

Verse 22. Saints of the Most High] To the supereminent saints; see Clarke’s note on “Daniel 7:18”.

Verses 19-22. Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast — Namely, what was intended to be signified by it. And of the ten horns that were in his head — Of what they were emblems; and of the other which came up, &c. — See verse 8; whose look was more stout than his fellows — Or more great and magnificent; or, who was more arrogant, and claimed a superiority over the rest: for though this horn, or power, was small at first, it at length exceeded all other powers in pomp and pre-eminence, exalting itself not only above all temporal authorities, but above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, 2 Thessalonians 2:4. I beheld — Chaldee, I was seeing, or considering attentively; and the same horn made war with the saints — By the saints here is to be understood the servants of Christ. So antichrist is described as making war with the saints, and overcoming them for a time: see the margin. Until the Ancient of days came — To vindicate their cause, to crush the idolaters, and to extirpate the dominion of antichrist: or until the final judgment, when the saints shall sit as assessors with Christ, shall be seated on thrones, and reign as kings and priests with God and Christ, and possess the kingdom for ever. And judgment was given to the saints, &c. — Power to judge and rule over their enemies. And the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom — See on verse 14.

19-22. See the interpretation of this vision, verses 23-25; also notes verses 7, 8. Given to the saints (verse 22) — Or, done unto the saints.

Verses 23, 24. The fourth beast shall be diverse from all kingdoms — As being managed under different forms of government; having a form of commonwealth at the beginning of its greatness, and afterward governed by kings and emperors; and in process of time being divided into ten kingdoms, or principalities; and all of them under the direction of one spiritual head. And the ten horns are ten kings — Or, kingdoms. A horn is an emblem of strength, so it comes to signify power and authority; and from thence it is applied to denote sovereignty, or dominion. The ten horns, or kingdoms, were to arise out of the dissolution of the Roman empire, which came to pass accordingly. There are various enumerations of these ten kingdoms in the division of the Roman empire, none of which are reckoned to commence earlier than the latter end of the fourth, or the beginning of the fifth century. Bishop Newton, in his fourteenth Dissertation, has given several lists, by Machiavel, by Mr. Mede, by Bishop Lloyd, and by Sir Isaac Newton; and at last has added one which he has selected from the others, and which he has placed in the eighth century. His words are, “The principal states and governments then were, 1. The senate of Rome, who revolted from the Greek emperors, and claimed and exerted the privilege of choosing a new western emperor; 2. The Greeks in Ravenna; 3. The Lombards in Lombardy; 4. The Huns in Hungary; 5. The Alemannes in Germany; 6. The Franks in France; 7. The Burgundians in Burgundy; 8. The Goths in Spain; 9. The Britons; 10. The Saxons in Britain. Not that there were constantly ten kingdoms, they were sometimes more and sometimes fewer; but, as Sir Isaac Newton says, ‘whatever was their number afterward, they are still called the ten kingdoms, from their first number.’“

And another shall arise after them — Greek, opisw autwn, behind them, as the words may be rendered; that is, either unperceived by them, or whose height, or dominion, should not acquire its summit till long after their establishment. This is generally agreed, by all Protestant interpreters, to be the kingdom of the pope, which was certainly of a very different nature from any of the former, being first ecclesiastical, or spiritual, and afterward claiming a temporal or civil jurisdiction. The LXX. add, that it should be distinguished from the former, kakoiv, in evils, or malignancies. And the kings, or kingdoms, which it should pluck up by the roots, or humble, as tapeinwsei, the word used by the LXX., signifies, (which is also the reading of the Vulgate,) are pointed out by the same prelate to be the exarchate of Ravenna, the kingdom of the Lombards, and the state of Rome. These states were reduced in the eighth century; and the epistles and bulls issued by the pope are, after that time, dated from the years of the commencement of the pope’s temporal jurisdiction, or advancement to the papal chair; and the pope, by wearing his triple crown, hath in a manner pointed himself out for the person here intended: see Bishop Newton and Mr. Wintle.

And what still more fully characterizes this power, and proves it to be intended of the Papacy, is, that it is said, in verse 8, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man; which denotes cunning and foresight, exercised in looking out and watching all opportunities of promoting one’s interest. “And the policy of the Roman hierarchy hath almost passed into a proverb. The pope is properly called an overlooker, or overseer: an episkopov, or bishop, in the literal sense of the word. In verses 8, 20, it is said, He had a mouth, speaking great things: and who hath been more noisy and blustering than the pope, especially in former ages; boasting of his supremacy, thundering out his bulls and anathemas, excommunicating princes, and absolving subjects from their allegiance? His look was more stout than his fellows, verse 20. And the pope assumes a superiority, not only over his fellow-bishops, but even over crowned heads: and requires his foot to be kissed, and greater honours to be paid to him than to kings and emperors themselves.”

23. For the proof that this fourth kingdom was not Rome or Greece, but the Syriac-Egyptian kingdom which immediately followed that of Alexander the Great, see notes verse 7 and Daniel 2:39, 40.

V. 24. And another-This seems to mean the Romish antichrist.

Verses 23, 24. The fourth beast shall be diverse from all kingdoms — As being managed under different forms of government; having a form of commonwealth at the beginning of its greatness, and afterward governed by kings and emperors; and in process of time being divided into ten kingdoms, or principalities; and all of them under the direction of one spiritual head. And the ten horns are ten kings — Or, kingdoms. A horn is an emblem of strength, so it comes to signify power and authority; and from thence it is applied to denote sovereignty, or dominion. The ten horns, or kingdoms, were to arise out of the dissolution of the Roman empire, which came to pass accordingly. There are various enumerations of these ten kingdoms in the division of the Roman empire, none of which are reckoned to commence earlier than the latter end of the fourth, or the beginning of the fifth century. Bishop Newton, in his fourteenth Dissertation, has given several lists, by Machiavel, by Mr. Mede, by Bishop Lloyd, and by Sir Isaac Newton; and at last has added one which he has selected from the others, and which he has placed in the eighth century. His words are, “The principal states and governments then were, 1. The senate of Rome, who revolted from the Greek emperors, and claimed and exerted the privilege of choosing a new western emperor; 2. The Greeks in Ravenna; 3. The Lombards in Lombardy; 4. The Huns in Hungary; 5. The Alemannes in Germany; 6. The Franks in France; 7. The Burgundians in Burgundy; 8. The Goths in Spain; 9. The Britons; 10. The Saxons in Britain. Not that there were constantly ten kingdoms, they were sometimes more and sometimes fewer; but, as Sir Isaac Newton says, ‘whatever was their number afterward, they are still called the ten kingdoms, from their first number.’“

And another shall arise after them — Greek, opisw autwn, behind them, as the words may be rendered; that is, either unperceived by them, or whose height, or dominion, should not acquire its summit till long after their establishment. This is generally agreed, by all Protestant interpreters, to be the kingdom of the pope, which was certainly of a very different nature from any of the former, being first ecclesiastical, or spiritual, and afterward claiming a temporal or civil jurisdiction. The LXX. add, that it should be distinguished from the former, kakoiv, in evils, or malignancies. And the kings, or kingdoms, which it should pluck up by the roots, or humble, as tapeinwsei, the word used by the LXX., signifies, (which is also the reading of the Vulgate,) are pointed out by the same prelate to be the exarchate of Ravenna, the kingdom of the Lombards, and the state of Rome. These states were reduced in the eighth century; and the epistles and bulls issued by the pope are, after that time, dated from the years of the commencement of the pope’s temporal jurisdiction, or advancement to the papal chair; and the pope, by wearing his triple crown, hath in a manner pointed himself out for the person here intended: see Bishop Newton and Mr. Wintle.

And what still more fully characterizes this power, and proves it to be intended of the Papacy, is, that it is said, in verse 8, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man; which denotes cunning and foresight, exercised in looking out and watching all opportunities of promoting one’s interest. “And the policy of the Roman hierarchy hath almost passed into a proverb. The pope is properly called an overlooker, or overseer: an episkopov, or bishop, in the literal sense of the word. In verses 8, 20, it is said, He had a mouth, speaking great things: and who hath been more noisy and blustering than the pope, especially in former ages; boasting of his supremacy, thundering out his bulls and anathemas, excommunicating princes, and absolving subjects from their allegiance? His look was more stout than his fellows, verse 20. And the pope assumes a superiority, not only over his fellow-bishops, but even over crowned heads: and requires his foot to be kissed, and greater honours to be paid to him than to kings and emperors themselves.”

24. The fourth kingdom is here represented as a beast whose “ten horns” are ten kings. There has been great diversity of opinion as to the particular kings meant. As the number is a round symbolical number it does not matter if the kings preceding Antiochus Epiphanes (the “little horn”) actually numbered a few less or a few more than ten. Professor Cowles, however, has pointed out that Daniel himself in chap. 11 (which is explanatory of the visions of chaps. 7 and 8) has referred particularly to just ten prominent kings ruling between the death of Alexander and the rise of the little horn — five of these being Ptolemies, namely, Lagus, Philadelphus, Euergetes, Philopator, Philometer (Daniel 11:5-27); five of them being Syrian kings: Seleucus Nicator, Antiochus Theos, Seleucus Callinicus, Antiochus the Great, and Seleucus Philopator (Daniel 11:5-20). Meinhold, on the other hand, believes Demetrius, Heliodorus, and Ptolemy Philometer to represent the three horns overthrown by Antiochus Epiphanes, the other seven horns symbolizing Seleucus I, II, III, IV, and Antiochus I, II, III. The question is unimportant, as there is practical unanimity of opinion among modern scholars that the little horn here (like that of 8:9-12) is Antiochus Epiphanes. The argument that Antiochus Epiphanes could not be the eleventh horn because he was not the eleventh, but the eighth successive king on the Syrian throne (Godet, Studies, 1882; Kohler, Lehrbuch, pp. 539, 540), is not strong when we consider the symbolism of number (see Introduction to Ezekiel, VIII), and the fact that it is not stated whether these horns were successive or in part contemporaneous.* Certainly the “antichrist” of a later era had Antiochan characteristics, just as Gog and Magog had Scythian characteristics (Ezekiel 38, 39; Revelation 20:8), but this does not exclude the reference to an earlier or later historic character. The older scholars, who thought Daniel’s fourth kingdom was Roman, interpreted these ten kings as ten kingdoms, but differed very materially in their guesses as to which kingdoms were meant. It seems to us conclusive that the fourth empire was not Roman. (See notes Daniel 2:39, 40.) All agree that Antiochus was the “vile person” who is spoken of as rising up after the ten successors of Alexander mentioned Daniel 11:3-21. The analogy of prophecy is in favor of the same reference to him here.

[*Three of the kings (horns) are not said to have been destroyed before Antiochus took the throne, but to have been afterward “subdued” by him. “Now the facts are that Antiochus usurped the throne upon the assassination of his elder brother, Seleucus Philopator; he superseded the rightful heir, Demetrius — who was at that time a hostage in Rome — and he humbled by sore defeat his nephew, Ptolemy Philometer, who had as good a right to the throne of Asia as himself (compare 1 Macc. 11:13).… Some reckon Heliodorus among the three who fell before Antiochus, for Appian testifies that he had seized the government by force. This view is open to no valid objection, for we should no more insist on a rigid interpretation of the number three than of the number ten.” — Terry.]

V. 25. Until a time and times-The numbers of Daniel and John seem to agree. Daniel was certainly prophetical in these things, and his prophecy reacheth to the end of times, even of antichrist’s reign.

Verse 25. He shall speak great words against the Most High] Sermones quasi Deus loquetur; “He shall speak as if he were God.” So St. Jerome quotes from Symmachus. To none can this apply so well or so fully as to the popes of Rome. They have assumed infallibility, which belongs only to God. They profess to forgive sins, which belongs only to God. They profess to open and shut heaven, which belongs only to God. They profess to be higher than all the kings of the earth, which belongs only to God. And they go beyond God in pretending to loose whole nations from their oath of allegiance to their kings, when such kings do not please them! And they go against God when they give indulgences for sin. This is the worst of all blasphemies!

And shall wear out the saints] By wars, crusades, massacres, inquisitions, and persecutions of all kinds. What in this way have they not done against all those who have protested against their innovations, and refused to submit to their idolatrous worship? Witness the exterminating crusades published against the Waldenses and Albinenses. Witness John Huss, and Jerome of Prague. Witness the Smithfield fires in England! Witness God and man against this bloody, persecuting, ruthless, and impure Church! And think to charge tines and laws] Appointing fasts and feasts; canonizing persons whom he chooses to call saints; granting pardons and indulgences for sins; instituting new modes of worship utterly unknown to the Christian Church; new articles of faith; new rules of practice; and reversing, with pleasure, the laws both of God and man.—Dodd. Until a time and times and the dividing of time.] In prophetic language a time signifies a year; and a prophetic year has a year for each day. Three years and a half (a day standing for a year, as in Daniel 9:24) will amount to one thousand two hundred and sixty years, if we reckon thirty days to each month, as the Jews do.

If we knew precisely when the papal power began to exert itself in the antichristian way, then we could at once fix the time of its destruction. The end is probably not very distant; it has already been grievously shaken by the French. In 1798 the French republican army under General Berthier took possession of the city of Rome, and entirely superseded the whole papal power. This was a deadly wound, though at present it appears to be healed; but it is but skinned over, and a dreadful cicatrice remains. The Jesuits, not JESUS, are now the Church’s doctors.

If the papal power, as a horn or temporal power, be intended here, which is most likely, (and we know that that power was given in 755 to Pope Stephen II. by Pepin, king of France,) counting one thousand two hundred and sixty years from that, we are brought to A.D. 2015, about one hundred and ninety years from the present [A.D. 1825.] But I neither lay stress upon nor draw conclusions from these dates. If the Church of Rome will reform itself, it will then be the true Christian Church, and will never be destroyed. Let it throw aside all that is ritually Jewish, all that is heathen; all that which pretends to be of God, and which is only of man; all doctrines that are not in the Bible; and all rites and ceremonies which are not of the appointment of Christ and his apostles; and then, all hail the once Roman, but now, after such a change, the HOLY, Catholic Church! Every true Protestant would wish rather the reform than the extinction of this Church.

Verse 25. He shall speak great words against the Most High — Symmachus reads, He shall speak great words, as the Most High; “setting himself above all laws, divine and human: arrogating to himself godlike attributes, and titles of holiness and infallibility; exacting obedience to his ordinances and decrees, in preference to, and in open violation of, reason and Scripture; insulting men and blaspheming God. In Gratian’s Decretals, the pope has the title of God given to him. And shall wear out the saints — By wars, and massacres, and inquisitions, persecuting and destroying the faithful servants of Jesus, and the true worshippers of God; who protest against his innovations, and refuse to comply with the idolatry practised in the Church of Rome. He shall think to change times and laws — Appointing fasts and feasts, canonizing saints, granting pardons and indulgences for sins, instituting new modes of worship, imposing new articles of faith, enjoining new rules of practice, and reversing at pleasure the laws of God and man.” — Bishop Newton.

And they shall be given, &c. — “A time, all agree, signifies a year; and a time, and times, and the dividing of time, or half a time, are three years and a half; and the ancient Jewish year, consisting of twelve months, and each month of thirty days, a time, and times, and half a time, or three years and a half, are reckoned in the Revelation 11:2, 3, and 12:6, 14, as equivalent to forty-two months, or twelve hundred and sixty days; and a day, in the style of the prophets, is a year; (see Ezekiel 4:4;) and it is confessed that the seventy weeks, in Daniel 9. are weeks of years, and consequently twelve hundred and sixty days are twelve hundred and sixty years. So long antichrist, or the little horn, will continue: but from what point of time the commencement of these twelve hundred and sixty years is to be dated, is not easy to determine. It should seem that they are to be computed from the full establishment of the power of the pope, and no less is implied in the expression, given into his hand. Now the power of the pope, as a horn, or temporal prince, it hath been shown, was established in the eighth century; and twelve hundred and sixty years from that time, will lead us down to about the year of Christ 2000, or the year of the world 6000: and there is an old tradition, both among Jews and Christians, that at the end of 6000 years the Messiah shall come, and the world shall be renewed; the reign of the wicked one shall cease, and the reign of the saints upon earth shall begin. But, as Irenæus says in a like case, it is surer and safer to wait for the completion of the prophecy than to conjecture and divine about it. When the end shall come, then we shall know better whence to date the beginning.” — Bishop Newton.

25. Antiochus Epiphanes is said (xi, 36) to “speak marvelous things against the God of gods,” and Jewish history is full of his brutal impieties and persecutions which wore out the saints (1 Macc. i and ii; 2 Macc. i and v; Josephus, Wars, I, 1:1; Antiquites, XII, 5:3; Apion, 2:1). The “times and law” (Hebrews) which he sought to change were those connected with the religious feasts and other sacred rites which must be offered in “due season” (compare Leviticus 23:4; Numbers 28:2, 4, 8, 11, 16, 17, 18, 26), and especially the Holy Sabbath. Antiochus sought to make Greeks of the Jews (Tacitus, 5:8), decreeing that all his subjects should be one people in religious customs, and specifically prohibiting circumcision and the observance of the Sabbath, on penalty of death, so “that they might forget the law, and change all the ordinances” (1 Macc. 1:41, 49; Polyb., 38:18). The whole temple was defiled (see notes 11:31) and the Jews were forced, under severest penalties, to give up their own worship and to take part in the orgies of the Grecian festivals (2 Macc. 6:7). The “time, times, and half a time” probably refers to the three and a half years during which Antiochus succeeded in interfering with the sacrificial offerings in the temple, yet it may have also been used as a symbol of persecution and evil, being the fracture of a perfect seven. (Compare Revelation 12:14, and Introduction to Ezekiel, VIII.) This symbolic meaning was probably understood not only by the Jews but by the Babylonians; for in the old Babylonian myth the horned dragon Tiamat, the enemy of the gods, who hurled one third of the stars of heaven into ruin by one whisk of her tail, was also given a period of rule somewhat resembling this (Gunkel, Shopfung und Chaos, pp. 266-278, 360, 390). See also notes Daniel 4:16-23; 5:25-28; 9:27; 12:7.

Verses 26, 27. But the judgment shall sit, &c. — God, in the course of his providence, will sit (speaking after the manner of men) in judgment on this usurping, tyrannical, and persecuting power, which shall be judged, condemned, degraded, consumed, and destroyed, and his authority never more revived, to the end of the world: see note on verses 10, 11. And the kingdom and dominion, &c., shall be given to the saints of the Most High — True religion shall universally prevail under the countenance and protection of Christian princes; and the kingdom of Christ shall be erected in power and glory in all parts of the earth. In other words, The stone cut out of the mountain without hands shall become itself a mountain, and fill the whole earth: see note on Daniel 2:44, 45, and on verse 14 of this chapter. If the reader will be at the pains to compare this vision of Daniel, concerning the four great wild beasts, and the exposition of it by the angel, with Nebuchadnezzar’s dream of the great image, as explained by Daniel, he will be struck with their perfect agreement with each other, and find the one illustrative of the other.

26. See notes verse 10. This does not refer to the General Judgment, but to the punishment of Antiochus by divinely directed agents after the close of the period represented by the “time, times, and half a time.” “The ministering agents of the Most High are continually interposing in history, removing kings and setting up kings (Daniel 2;21), and this they will continue to do unto the end, that is, until the divine purpose is consummated. Just when this end will be and how it will be reached are matters on which no specific revelations are here given.” — Terry.

Verse 27. The kingdom and dominion] The people of the saints of the Most High, or the people who are the supereminent saints, shall have the kingdom. Whatever name they may be distinguished by among men, these are the people, and theirs is the Church, that no lapse of time shall injure, and no power be able to destroy; but shall last as long as time shall endure.

Verses 26, 27. But the judgment shall sit, &c. — God, in the course of his providence, will sit (speaking after the manner of men) in judgment on this usurping, tyrannical, and persecuting power, which shall be judged, condemned, degraded, consumed, and destroyed, and his authority never more revived, to the end of the world: see note on verses 10, 11. And the kingdom and dominion, &c., shall be given to the saints of the Most High — True religion shall universally prevail under the countenance and protection of Christian princes; and the kingdom of Christ shall be erected in power and glory in all parts of the earth. In other words, The stone cut out of the mountain without hands shall become itself a mountain, and fill the whole earth: see note on Daniel 2:44, 45, and on verse 14 of this chapter. If the reader will be at the pains to compare this vision of Daniel, concerning the four great wild beasts, and the exposition of it by the angel, with Nebuchadnezzar’s dream of the great image, as explained by Daniel, he will be struck with their perfect agreement with each other, and find the one illustrative of the other.

27. The saints receive “the kingdom” because their leader has received it. The description here of the kingdom of the Most High is word for word a description of the kingdom of the “one like a son of man.” (See note verse 14.) Behrmann is probably right in saying that the Jews themselves did not discriminate between the ruler and the nation as we do, yet, as he shows, it would be as inconsistent to say because of this verse that the Son of man is identical with the Jewish nation as to compare Daniel 2:44, with 2:34, and say that the stone designated the Jewish people. Verse 14 speaks of a God-sent King, and this verse shows what the people gained through him. Of course the full meaning of this prophecy could not have been understood when it was written. It is a mistake to think that the best fulfillment of prophecy always lay in the mind of the prophet. He might speak of trouble near at hand, and a national deliverance soon to come; but in God’s providence the complete realization of what he saw and hoped could only come through the spiritual and Messianic kingdom and its spiritual prince. As in so many other Bible passages (compare Ezekiel 34:27-31; 37:26; 39:25-29), the immediate hope broadens into the vision of a world-wide victory for God and his people.

V. 28. Of the matter-Of the vision, and the angel’s interpretation.

Verse 28. The end of the matter.] So said the expounding angel; and he said so because the purpose of God had determined it. In considering these things, and looking at the evils that shall come upon the world before those auspicious times can take place, I may say with Daniel, My cogitations much troubled me, and my countenance changed in me: but I keep the matter of my conjectures and consequent feelings in my own heart. DANIEL

Verse 28. Hitherto is the end of the matter — Here the angel that spoke to me concerning these matters finished his discourse. As for me, my cogitations much troubled me — The extraordinary circumstances of the vision made a great impression upon my mind; and it was matter of great trouble to me, to foresee the profanation of God’s laws and worship, and the persecutions and calamities which should come upon his church and people. And my countenance changed in me — The impression which this vision made upon me, weakened my spirits, and altered my complexion, as if I had had a fit of sickness. But I kept the matter in my heart — I laid the matter up in my memory and heart, and meditated frequently upon it, and by that means was enabled to give an exact account of the vision, and its interpretation, in writing, for the use and benefit of others as well as myself; and that after ages might have this great proof of the Almighty’s governing all the affairs of the world, and of his foreknowledge of future events.

28. Hitherto [or, so far, Bevan] is the end of the matter — The vision ended at this point, though this does not indicate at all that this was the original end of Daniel’s prophecy. (Compare Konig, Einleitung, N. 384.) Daniel was much “troubled” to understand the vision, and secreting it in his heart (compare Luke 2:19), pondered over its meaning until his countenance lost its brightness (Aramaic).