Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 11:4
And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.
4. The disruption of Alexander’s empire, after his death.
when he shall stand up ] or, at the time of his standing up. The expression, if correct, will be intended to emphasize the short-lived duration of Alexander’s empire (his reign extended from 336 to 323; his conquests in Asia from 334 to 323). But in view of Dan 8:8, Grtz’s emendation, ‘when he shall become strong ’ ( for ), is a probable one; the reference will then be to the manner in which Alexander was suddenly struck down in the midst of his successes.
be broken ] The word is, no doubt, suggested by Dan 8:8, where it is used of the ‘great horn,’ which symbolizes Alexander.
toward the four winds of heaven ] So also Dan 8:8. Alexander’s empire, after his death, was broken up; and in the end the four kingdoms of Cassander, Lysimachus, Seleucus, and Ptolemy arose upon its ruins (see on Dan 8:8).
but (it shall) not (belong) to his posterity ] Alexander, the conqueror’s youthful son by Roxana, and Herakles, an illegitimate son, were both murdered in 310 or 309, the former by Cassander directly, the latter by Polysperchon at Cassander’s persuasion (Diod. Sic. xix. 105, xx. 28).
nor (be) according to his dominion, wherewith he ruled ] The divided kingdom would not, in any of its parts, retain the power and prestige which Alexander enjoyed. Cf. Dan 8:22, ‘but not with his power.’
pluckt up ] The figure is that of a tree: it is common in Jeremiah, as Jer 1:10, Jer 18:7, Jer 31:28.
and (it shall be) for others besides these ] besides Alexander’s generals, with allusion to the independent petty dynasties which arose gradually in Cappadocia, Armenia, and other countries, during the century and a half that followed upon the death of Alexander (Jerome, von Leng., Bevan).
From this point onwards the author confines himself to the kingdoms of the north and of the south, i.e. of the Seleucidae (in Syria), and of the Ptolemies (in Egypt), these being the two dynasties which during the period that elapsed from the death of Alexander to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, successively dominated Palestine.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And when he shall stand up – In the might and power of his kingdom. When his power shall be fully established. I understand this, with Rosenmuller and Havernick, as meaning, when he shall be at the height of his authority and power, then his kingdom would be broken up. The reference is, undoubtedly, to the sudden death of Alexander; and the sense is, that his empire would not gradually diminish and decay, but that some event would occur, the effect of which would be to rend it into four parts.
His kingdom shall be broken – To wit, by his death. The language is such as is properly applicable to this, and indeed implies this, for it is said that it would not be to his posterity – an event which might be naturally expected to occur; or, in other words, the allusion to his posterity is such language as would be employed on the supposition that the reference here is to his death.
And shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven – Into four parts. For the remarkable fulfillment of this prediction, see the notes at Dan 8:8.
And not to his posterity – See also the notes at Dan 8:8.
Nor according to his dominion which he ruled – This was literally true of the division of the empire. No one of his successors ever obtained as wide a dominion as he did himself.
For his kingdom shall be plucked up – By his death. This does not naturally mean that it would be by conquest, for it is said that it would be divided toward the four winds of heaven – language which is not properly expressive of conquest. All that is implied is met by the supposition, that at his decease the kingdom which had been founded by him, and which had been sustained by his valor and political wisdom, would fall to pieces.
Even for others beside those – That is, to others beside those to whom it should be at first divided. Literally, exclusively, or to the exclusion of – mllebad. The word those refers to his posterity; and the meaning is, that the process of division would not stop with them, or that the four portions of the empire, as thus divided, would not remain in their hands, or pass to their posterity. There would be other changes and other divisions; and it was not to be expected that just four, and no more, empires would grow out of the one which had been founded, or that when that one should be divided into four parts, that partition would always continue. There would be other divisions, and other princes besides those who first obtained the empire would come in, and the process of division would ultimately be carried much farther. It is unnecessary to say that this occurred in the empire founded by Alexander. It was, soon after his death, separated into four parts, but at no distant period this arrangement was broken up, and all traces of the empire, as established by him, or as divided among his four successors, wholly disappeared.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 4. His kingdom shall be broken] Shall, after his death, be divided among his four chief generals, as we have seen before. See Da 8:22.
And not to his posterity] The family of Alexander had a most tragical end:
1. His wife Statira was murdered soon after his death by his other wife Roxana.
2. His brother Aridaeus, who succeeded him, was killed, together with his wife Euridice, by command of Olympias, Alexander’s mother, after he had been king about six years and some months.
3. Olympias herself was killed by the soldiers in revenge.
4. Alexander AEgus, his son, together with his mother Roxana, was slain by order of Cassander.
5. Two years after, his other son Hercules, with his mother Barsine, was privately murdered by Polysperchon; so that in fifteen years after his death not one of his family or posterity remained alive!
“Blood calls for blood.” He (Alexander) was the great butcher of men. He was either poisoned, or killed himself by immoderate drinking, when he was only thirty-two years and eight months old: and a retributive Providence destroyed all his posterity, so that neither root nor branch of them was left on the face of the earth. Thus ended Alexander, the great butcher; and thus ended his family and posterity.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
When he shall stand up; when he is come to his highest, as monarch of the world, &c. After he had enjoyed that title a little while, his kingdom was broken, as the text saith. So it was, into four pieces, whereof we have spoken, Da 7; Da 8.
Not to his posterity, but to four of his chief commanders, who should reign in the four quarters of the world, i.e. Alexanders conquest, though here he only mentions two of them, Egypt and Syria, i.e. the south and the north. Alexander had a brother, named Aridaeus, and two sons, Alexander and Hercules, besides others of his blood, but the nobles destroyed them all; and so the whole race of Alexander was rooted out to fulfil this prophecy; but judicially, for his great cruelty, pride, and luxury.
Nor according to his dominion; they did not reign as kings at first, but only as captains; and as to the extent of their dominion, it was far less than Alexanders, yea, all four fell short of his.
For others beside those; some lesser commanders shared several parts of that empire, as Eumenes, Philotes, with many more, at least ten; as histories tell us.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
4. kingdom . . . divided toward . .. four windsthe fourfold division of Alexander’s kingdom athis death (Dan 8:8; Dan 8:22),after the battle of Ipsus, 301 B.C.
not to his posterity(Seeon Da 8:8; Da8:22).
nor according to hisdominionNone of his successors had so wide a dominion asAlexander himself.
others besides thosebesidesAlexander’s sons, Hercules by Barsine, Darius’ daughter, andAlexander by Roxana, who were both slain [MAURER].Rather, besides the four successors to the four chiefdivisions of the empire, there will be other lesser chiefs who shallappropriate smaller fragments of the Macedonian empire [JEROME].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken,…. When Alexander was risen up to his highest pitch of grandeur, was sole monarch of the world, in the height of his ambition, in the prime of his days, he was cut off by death; his kingdom remained no more one, but became many, was seized by different persons, his generals, and so broke to pieces:
and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; which seem to have respect to the four horns or kings, which came up in his place, Da 8:8, and among whom his kingdom was parted; Ptolemy reigned in Egypt to the south; Antigonus in Asia to the north; Seleucus in Babylon and Syria to the east; and Cassander in Macedonia to the west:
and not to his posterity; for though he had two sons, one by Barsine, whose name was Hercules, who was living at his death; and another by Roxane, born after his death, whose name was Alexander; yet they were both destroyed by Cassander, or his means, that he might enjoy Macedonia p:
nor according to his dominion which he ruled; their dominion was not so large and powerful as Alexander’s was, being divided into several parts; see Da 8:22: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others besides those; either besides his posterity, who had no share in it, and so, with respect to his family, was like a tree plucked up by the roots, and, as to their concern in it, withered away at once; or, besides the four governors before mentioned, there were others that had, at least for a while, some lesser shares in the kingdom, as Eumenes, Philotas, Leonnatus, and others; but, at length, all were reduced to the kings of Egypt and Syria, the Lagidae and Seleucidae, which the following part of the prophecy chiefly concerns; and, besides these, for the Romans also, to whom this kingdom came.
p Diodor. Sicul. Bibliothec. l. 19. p. 739. & l. 20. p. 761.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
This language is concise, but there is no ambiguity in the sense. First of all the angel says, After that brave king had stood up, his empire should be broken in pieces: for when Alexander had arrived at his height, he suddenly fell sick, and shortly afterwards died at Babylon. Ambassadors had assembled round him from every quarter. He was quite intoxicated by prosperity, and very probably poisoned himself. Historians, however, have viewed him as a remarkable example of singular valor, and so they have pretended and have related, because at least they thought so, that he was deceitfully poisoned by Cassander. But we all know how intemperately and immoderately he indulged in drinking; he almost buried himself in wine, and was seized with disease amidst his cups, and sank under it, because no remedy was found for him. This, then, was Alexander’s poison. Whichever way we understand it, he fell suddenly, almost as soon as he began to stand. After conquering nearly the whole East, he came to Babylon, and was uncertain in his plans as to the employment of his forces, after he had procured peace for the whole East. He was then anxious to transfer his armies to either Europe or Africa. The angel says, After he had stood up, meaning, after he had acquired the monarchy of the whole East, his kingdom should be broken up. He uses this simile, because the whole power of Alexander was not so much extinguished as broken into separate parts. We know how the twelve chiefs who were his generals drew the spoils to themselves; every one took a portion of his kingdom, and divided it among themselves, as we have previously stated, just as if it were torn from their master’s body. All consented in raising his brother Aridaeus to the dignity of king, and they called him Philip, that, while his sons were young, the memory of his father might commend them to the world. But four kingdoms at length issued from Alexander’s monarchy. It is unnecessary here to refer to what we may read at our leisure in the writings of historians.
The Prophet only touches shortly on those points which relate to the instruction of the Church; he does not relate in order or in detail the events narrated in history; he only says, His empire shall be broken, and shall be divided, says he, towards the four winds of heaven The angel omits that partition which assigned the treasure to one, and gave the office of counselor to Philip: Perdiccas was the guardian of his son, and he with others obtained a portion of his dominions. Seleucus obtained Syria, to whom his son Antiochus succeeded; Antigonus became prefect of Asia Minor; Cassander, the father of Antipater, seized the kingdom of Macedon for himself; Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, who had been a common soldier, possessed Egypt. These are the four kingdoms of which the angel now treats. For Egypt was situated to the south of Judea, and Syria to the north, as we shall afterwards have occasion to observe. Macedonia came afterwards, and then Asia Minor, both east and west. But the angel does not enter into any complicated details, but shortly enumerates whatever was necessary for the common instruction of the elect people. The common consent of all writers has handed down these facts, — four kingdoms were constituted at length out of many portions, after the chiefs had been so mutually slain by one another that four only survived, namely, Ptolemy, Seleucus, Antigonus, and Cassander. Afterwards the kingdom of Antiochus was extended when Antigonus was conquered; for Antiochus added Asia Minor to the kingdom of Syria. But Antiochus stood only for a time, and hence the angel truly and properly states this empire to have been divided into four parts.
He next adds, And not to his posterity No one could have guessed what the angel predicted so many years before Alexander’s birth; for he was not born till a hundred years after this period. Those who know the boldness of his warlike schemes, the rapidity of his movements, and the success of his measures, would never be persuaded of this result, — the complete destruction of all his posterity, and the utter extinction of his race.
Had Alexander lived quietly at home, he might have married, and have become the father of children who would have been his undisputed successors. He died young, soon after reaching the age of thirty; still he might have married, and have had heirs to his throne. He had a brother, Aridaeus, and other relations, among whom was his uncle Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, and a royal offspring might thus have been preserved, and a successor prepared for him. After he had subdued both upper and lower Asia, he became master of Syria, Egypt, and Judea, and extended his power to the Persians, while his fame extended over Africa and Europe. Since no one dared to raise a finger against him, as he possessed a most magnificent army, and all his generals were bound to him by most important benefits, and so many of his prefects were enriched by his extreme liberality, who would have thought that all his posterity and relations would be thus blotted out? He left; two sons, but they were slain as well as his brother Aridaeus, while his wives and his mother, aged eighty years, shared the same fate. Nor did Cassander spare her, for she intrigued against him. At length, as if God would punish so many slaughters committed by Alexander, he wished his whole posterity to be extinguished. And yet, as I have stated, no foreign enemy was the agent in inflicting such heavy punishments. He had subjugated the whole East, and his bearing was such, as if the whole monarchy of that portion of the world had descended to him from his ancestors by hereditary right. As the world contained no enemy for him, his foes sprang from his own home; they slew his mother, his wives, his children, and all his relatives, and utterly rooted out all his race. We observe, then, with what clearness and certainty the angel predicts events entirely concealed from that age, and for hundred years afterwards, and such as would never be, credited by mankind. There seems a great contrast in the language; his kingdom shall be broken, it shall be divided towards the four winds of heaven, and not to his posterity; that is, although the four kingdoms should spring up in the four quarters of the world, yet, none of Alexander’s posterity should remain in a single place, or obtain even the least portion of his dominions. This was a remarkable proof of God’s wrath against the cruelty of Alexander; not that he was savage by nature, but ambition seized upon him, and made him bloodthirsty, and indisposed him to desire any end to his warfare. God, therefore, avenged that grasping disposition of Alexander’s, by allowing the whole of his race thus to perish with disgrace and horrible cruelty. On this account that. pride of his which wished to be thought a son of Jupiter, and which condemned to death all his friends and followers who would not prostrate themselves before him as a god; — that pride, I say, never could secure a single descendant to reign in his place, or even to hold a single satrapy. Not to his posterity, says the angel, and not according to his dominion.
He passes to the four kings of which he had spoken: It shall not break forth, he says, namely, from the four kings. He had already stated their foreign extraction, not in any way derived from the family of that king; for none of the four should equal his power, because his kingdom should be expired. Here the angel seems to omit intervening events, and speaks of an ultimate destruction. We know how the past king Perseus was conquered by the Romans, and how the kingdom of Antiochus was partly destroyed by war, and partly oppressed by fraud. And the angel seems to mark this. We may interpret it more to the point, by considering the cessation of Alexander’s empire, with reference to his own race, as if the angel had stated that none of his successors should acquire equal power with himself. And why so? Not one of them could accomplish it. Alexander acquired so mighty a name that all people willingly submitted to his sway, and no single successor could sustain the burden of the whole. Hence his kingdom, as far as it related to himself and His posterity, was divided, and no one succeeded to his power and his opulence. And it shall be given to others. The angel here explains his meaning. The destruction of the kingdom ought not to be explained particularly of single parts, for each seized his own portion for himself, and his successors were all strangers. And to others besides those; meaning, his kingdom shall be seized upon by officers who are not of his posterity; that is, strangers shall rush into Alexander’s place, and no successor shall arise from his own kindred. It afterwards follows, —
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(4) Broken.The shortness of the kings reign is implied; the moment that he has arisen he will come to nothing. As in Dan. 8:8, the great horn was broken, so here the kingdom is broken and dismembered. This has been explained to mean the sudden collapse of the Greek empire after the death of Alexander.
Not to his posterity.The kingdom disappears without the members of the kings family reaping any benefit from it. It is plucked up for others besides thesei.e., to the exclusion of his lawful heirsand strangers shall possess the fragments of his empire. This is explained of the partition of Alexanders empire among his generals, and of the murder of his two sons, Hercules and Alexander, but the language is too indefinite to make any such identification certain. The revelation directs our attention to a self-willed king, whose large empire is to come to a sudden and unexpected end; the ruins of it are not to benefit his posterity, but apparently two strangers, who are designated king of the north and king of the south respectively.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. This is a reference to what has been previously stated more explicitly concerning Alexander and the ending of his empire (Dan 8:5-8). This identification is made easier by the statement that the kingdom was not divided between the posterity of this king, but should be for others beside those. (See notes Dan 8:8; Dan 8:21.) No one of these successors to this “mighty king” ruled according to his dominion, but over a territory and with a power much inferior to his.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And when he shall stand up his kingdom will be broken and will be divided towards the four winds of heaven. But not to his posterity, nor with similar dominion to that with which he ruled, for his kingdom will be plucked up even for others beside these.’
This is not the epitaph that Alexander would have desired. He stood up only to be broken. So was Alexander the Great dismissed by God. His great empire was just a passing fancy. ‘Divided towards the four winds of heaven’ may be intended to signify heavenly princes over each of the four sections into which the empire eventually split, compare Dan 10:13; Dan 10:20. (It may be simply directional but ‘of heaven’ usually denotes more, depicting heavenly activity). But his throne would not go to ‘his posterity’. As mentioned above both his young sons were murdered. All he had achieved would be for others, ‘plucked up even for others beside these’, initially for all his generals, but gradually uniting into four separate sections. The mighty ‘unified’ power of his empire would not be sustained. However strong they may seem, empires rise, and divide, and fall. As with the image in chapter 2 the empires were deteriorating in splendour.
The two that would concern Israel were the Egyptian empire under the Ptolemies (the king of the south) and the Syrian empire under the Seleucids (the king of the north). Sadly for Israel both coveted Palestine.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Dan 11:4. When he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken When he shall have stood up. These particulars have been illustrated before, chap. Dan 8:8-22. Alexander died at Babylon, at the age of thirty-two years and eight months only, of which he reigned twelve years and eight months. In so short a time did this sun of glory rise and set! And in the space of about fifteen years after this, his family and posterity became extinct. His wife Statira was murdered soon after his death by his other wife Roxana. His brother Aridaeus, who succeeded him, was killed, together with his wife Eurydice, by the command of Olympias, the mother of Alexander, after he had been king six years and some months; and not long after, Olympias herself was slain by the soldiers in revenge. Alexander AEgus, a son by Roxana, in the fourteenth year of his age was privately murdered, together with his mother, by order of Cassander; and, two years after, Hercules, the other son of Alexander, by Barsine, was also, with his mother, privately murdered by Polysperchon. Such was the miserable end of Alexander’s family! After which the governors assumed each in his province the title of king. Thus was Alexander’s kingdom broken, and divided, not to his posterity; but was plucked up even for others; and divided towards the four winds of heaven; for four of his captains prevailed over the rest, as was before observed on chap. Dan 8:8. But though the kingdom of Alexander was divided into four principal parts, yet only two of them, Egypt and Syria, have a place in this prophesy. These two were by far the greatest and most considerable; and these two at one time were in a manner the only remaining kingdoms of the four. These two likewise continued distinct kingdoms after the others were swallowed up by the Romans. But there is a more proper and peculiar reason for enlarging upon these two particularly; because Judges, lying betwixt them, was sometimes in the possession of the kings of Egypt, and sometimes of the kings of Syria: and it is in respect of their situation to Judea, that the kings of Egypt and Syria are called kings of the south and the north. See Newton. Houbigant renders the latter part of this verse thus, But not to his posterity; nor shall it be of so great power as was his: for his kingdom shall be disjointed even among others, and those four.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Dan 11:4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.
Ver. 4. And when he shall stand up. ] And seemeth to be best underlaid, set to live, as we say, when he standeth on his best bottom, expecting ambassadors at Babylon from all the world, requiring divine honours from his Grecians, and enjoining the Jews that their dates should be taken from his reign, and that all the priests’ sons born that year should be called Alexanders.
His kingdom shall be broken.
And shall be divided toward the four winds.
And not to his posterity.
Nor according to his dominion.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
broken. See Dan 8:8.
divided. See Dan 8:22.
winds. Hebrew. ruach. App-9.
not to his posterity. But to his generals. Compare “not in his power” (Dan 8:22).
others beside those: i.e. beside those four. See note on Dan 8:22. That there is a break between the past and the future is manifest from Dan 10:14, of which this chapter is the continuation. Those who take verses: Dan 11:5-20 as belonging to the past do not agree as to the interpretation from history. We give the commonly held view, making the break between Dan 11:20 and Dan 11:21.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Dan 11:4
Dan 11:4 And when he shall stand up,H5975 his kingdomH4438 shall be broken,H7665 and shall be dividedH2673 toward the fourH702 windsH7307 of heaven;H8064 and notH3808 to his posterity,H319 norH3808 according to his dominionH4915 whichH834 he ruled:H4910 forH3588 his kingdomH4438 shall be plucked up,H5428 even for othersH312 besideH4480 H905 those.H428
Dan 11:4
And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.
Alexander the Great died of a fever in 323 BC at the age of 32. He was married to Roxane who was pregnant with Alexander IV. The empire had been newly forged and was still unstable so with the death of Alexander and no apparent heir to replace him, and with no regent appointed to reign in his heir’s stead, the leadership of the vast empire fell into dispute and was broken into four separate kingdoms. Macedon and Greece came under the rule of Cassander. Thrace and Bithynia were under the reign of Lysimachus, Egypt under Ptolemy, and Syria under Seleucus. This dividing of Alexander’s kingdom corresponds with the four horns of the leopard beast in Daniel’s vision of the four kingdoms, Alexander himself being the broken horn.
Important to keep in mind with the dividing of Alexander’s kingdom is that it was anything but a calm and orderly process. There was a confusing flurry of ambitious, power hungry men who served under Alexander the Great. There was everything one would expect from such a situation as an empire the size of Alexander’s which was suddenly left without its leader and without a living heir. There was murder, war, deceit, deception, treachery and assassination at every turn. This Bible student has read numerous accounts of the wars which ensued immediately after the death of Alexander and every single one of them have been a quagmire of confusing facts that will make one’s head spin. These power struggles were called the wars of the Diadochi. The word Diadochi means successors, so the conflicts over Alexander’s kingdom came to be known as the wars of the successors. There were four major conflicts which spanned a period of time from 322 to 301 BC. And after that, the conflicts continued as the territories were constantly disputed and the power hungry kings struggled to seize more land for themselves.
To make the events more easy to understand and keep straight in our minds, we’re going to focus on the events of this vision from the perspective of the Jews. There were two major powers in view. This was the kingdom of the north and the kingdom of the south. Jerusalem was caught in the middle between the two and were naturally going to get caught up in the power struggle between the king of the north and the king of the south. The kings of the north were of Seleucid dynasty who ruled over the territories associated with Babylon, otherwise known as Syria. The kings of the south were of the Ptolemaic Dynasty who ruled over the territories of Egypt. Recall from the study of Nebuchadnezzar’s initial overthrow of Jerusalem that he accomplished this on his way to Egypt. Jerusalem suffered a great deal as a consequence of being between Babylon and Egypt and the consequences of their location was going to further plague them in the centuries to come. The Jews of Palestine lay as the buffer between Syria and Egypt and were therefore destined to suffer in the conflicts between these two powers.
“and not to his posterity, “
The kingdom was not divided according to Alexander’s design. It was more like the plundering of a dead man’s possessions rather than the orderly administration of one’s holdings. The wars that raged over the Greek Empire lasted for centuries and their lack of unity and constant warring among themselves facilitated their eventual overthrow by the Roman Empire. Had the Greek empire not been ravaged by war and divided from within by internal power struggles, it is unlikely the Roman Empire would have been able to rise to power and overthrow the Greeks. As it was, the Roman Empire grew in strength slowly while the major powers which were the old Greek Empire fought among themselves.
“nor according to his dominion which he ruled”
The kingdom was not divided according to any law of the empire. It was divided up among the most powerful generals of Alexander according to who had the power to take and defend what they could seize.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
he shall stand: Job 20:5-7, Psa 37:35, Psa 37:36, Psa 49:6-12, Psa 73:17-20, Luk 12:20
and shall be: Dan 7:6, Dan 8:8, Dan 8:22, Psa 39:6, Ecc 2:18, Ecc 2:19, Ecc 4:8, Mat 12:25
be plucked: Dan 7:8, Jer 12:15, Jer 12:17, Jer 18:7, Jer 31:40, Jer 45:4
Reciprocal: Jer 49:36 – the four winds Dan 8:1 – me Daniel Dan 11:5 – and one Zec 6:6 – go forth after
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Dan 11:4. When he shall stand up means that just as Alexander reaches the height of his glory lie will come to his end, and his conquests will be divided into four parts. See the comments and quotation from history at chapter 8: 8. Not to his posterity refers. to the fact that Alexander died without any descendants to receive his kingdom, as may be seen in the historical quotation referred to. Nor according to his dominion means that no man lived in Greece who was strong enough to handle the dominion left by Alexander, since no one was as strong as he. I shall quote again from history as follows: “And when he [Alexander] shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided towards the four winds of heaven and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled; for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others namely, besides the four greater princes. We have already seen the vast empire of Alexander parcelled out into four great Kingdoms; without including those foreign princes who founded other kingdoms in Cappadocia, Armenia, Bithynta, Heraclea. and on the Bosphorus. AH this was present to Daniel.-Boltin, Ancient History, Volume 3, Page 597. From the various citations to history that have been offered the reader, he may understand that the pronoun those with which the verse closes, refers to the four winds or the four divisions into which Alexanders conquests fell at his death. Others besides means the forces in the world that finally swallowed up the realms of the four princes of Alexander, since they were not strong enough to retain them. As the statement has already been made by the historian elsewhere, No one was strong enough to handle the sword that fell from the hand of Alexander.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Dan 11:4. his kingdom shall be broken: an allusion to the division of Alexanders empire after his death (Dan 8:8*).not to posterity: Alexander left no children to succeed him, and the son born after his death was murdered before he reached manhood.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
11:4 And when he shall stand up, {e} his kingdom shall be broken, {f} and shall be divided toward the {g} four winds of heaven; and not to his {h} posterity, nor according to {i} his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside {k} those.
(e) For when his estate was most flourishing, he overcame himself with drink, and so fell into a disease: or as some write, was poisoned by Cassander.
(f) For his twelve chief princes first divided his kingdom among themselves.
(g) After this his monarchy was divided into four: for Seleucus had Syria, Antigonus had Asia minor, Cassander had the kingdom of Macedonia, and Ptolemeus had Egypt.
(h) Thus God avenged Alexander’s ambition and cruelty, in causing his posterity to be murdered, partly by their father’s chief friends, and partly by one another.
(i) None of these four will be able to be compared to the power of Alexander.
(k) That is, his posterity having no part of it.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
After conquering most of the ancient world, even farther east than the Persian Empire had extended, Alexander died prematurely in Babylon, his imperial capital, in 323 B.C. His two sons, Hercules and Alexander, were both murdered when they were very young, as was his uncle, Philip Arrhidaeus. Consequently, his kingdom eventually was divided up between his four leading generals (cf. Dan 7:6; Dan 8:8; Dan 8:22). Cassander ruled Macedonia-Greece, Lysimachus governed Thrace-Asia Minor, Seleucus took the rest of Asia except lower Syria and Palestine, and Ptolemy reigned over Egypt and Palestine. This Greek Empire following Alexander’s demise did not retain the strength that it had previously under the centralized authority of Alexander.