2<\/strong>. And now will I<\/em> declare truth unto<\/strong> thee<\/em> ] something which will be verified by the event (cf. Dan 10:21<\/span>).<\/p>\n The four kings of Persia.<\/p>\n stand up<\/em> ] i.e. arise, as Dan 8:23<\/span>, and below, Dan 11:3-4<\/em><\/span> ; Dan 11:7<\/em><\/span><\/em> ; Dan 11:20-21<\/em><\/span><\/em>.<\/p>\n three kings<\/em> ] the three kings following Cyrus (Dan 10:1<\/span>) are Cambyses (b.c. 529 522), Gaumta (Pseudo-Smerdis) 522 (for 7 months), and Darius Hystaspis (522 485). Gaumta, however, might easily be disregarded by the writer: in this case, the third king would be Xerxes (485 465).<\/p>\n in Persia<\/em> ] to, belonging to<\/strong>, Persia:<\/em> the construction, as Deu 23:2-3<\/span> [3, 4]; Jer 13:13<\/span> (see R.V. marg.<\/em>); and frequently.<\/p>\n the fourth<\/em> ] the fourth, following the ‘three’? or the fourth, including Cyrus (who is reigning at the time, Dan 10:1<\/span>), i.e. the last of the ‘three’? The latter interpretation is the more probable one: otherwise, why was not ‘ four<\/em> kings shall stand up’ said? In either case, the fourth king is Xerxes, Gaumta being counted in the former case but not in the latter. On Xerxes’ wealth and strength, see Hdt. vii. 20 99 (the account of the immense armament prepared by him against Greece).<\/p>\n and<\/em> when he is waxed strong<\/strong> ] The same expression (in the Heb.) as 2Ch 12:1<\/span>; 2Ch 26:16<\/span>.<\/p>\n he shall stir up all<\/em> (in conflict) with<\/strong>, &c.] he will set in motion ( Dan 11:25<\/em><\/span>; Isa 13:17<\/span>; Jer 50:9<\/span>) all the men and forces of his vast empire. The allusion is to the well-known expedition against Greece, to which Xerxes devoted all his treasures and all his energies, and which ended in the disastrous defeat at Salamis, b.c. 480. The description of Greece as a ‘realm’ or kingdom, is, of course, inexact: Greece, in the age of Xerxes, consisted of a number of independent states, democracies or oligarchies; a Greek ‘kingdom’ did not arise till the days of Philip and Alexander of Macedon.<\/p>\n ( 2<\/strong>) Dan 11:2<\/span> to Dan 12:4<\/span>. The revelation given to Daniel.<\/p>\n This consists of a survey of the history from the beginning of the Persian period down to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, followed by a description of the Messianic age, to begin afterwards. The description is brief and general in its earlier part, more detailed in the later parts. The angel first refers briefly to the doings of four Persian kings ( Dan 11:2<\/em><\/span>), and of Alexander the Great ( Dan 11:3<\/em><\/span>), with the division of his empire after his death ( Dan 11:4<\/em><\/span>); then narrates more fully the leagues and conflicts between the kings of Antioch (‘the kings of the north’), and of Egypt (‘the kings of the south’), in the centuries following ( Dan 11:5-20<\/em><\/span>); and finally, most fully of all, describes the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes ( Dan 11:21-45<\/em><\/span>), including his conflicts with Egypt, and the persecution of the Jews ( Dan 11:30<\/em><\/span><\/span> b<\/em><\/span>39<\/span>). The death of Antiochus is followed by a resurrection (of Israelites), and the advent of the Messianic age (Dan 12:1-3<\/span>). The revelation is intended to shew that the course of history is in God’s hands, and that though it may bring with it a period of trial for His people, this will be followed, at the appointed time, by its deliverance. It is thus designed particularly for the encouragement of those living in the season of trial, i.e. under the persecution of Antiochus; it is accordingly to be ‘sealed up’ by Daniel until then (Dan 12:4<\/span>).<\/p>\n As is usual in apocalyptic literature (Enoch, Baruch, 2 Esdras, &c.), no names<\/em> are mentioned; the characters and events referred to being described in veiled language, which sometimes leaves the interpretation uncertain. The Commentary of Jerome is important in this chapter, on account of its preserving notices from writers no longer extant.<\/p>\n And now will I show thee the truth – <\/B>That is, the truth about events that are to occur in the future, and which will accord with what is written in the scripture of truth, Dan 10:21<\/span>.<\/P> Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia – <\/B>The phrase stand up means that there would be so many kings in Persia; that is, there would be three before the fourth which he mentions. The same Hebrew word here rendered stand up (<\/span> <\/I>amad<\/I>) occurs in Dan 11:3-4<\/span>, Dan 11:6-8<\/span>, Dan 11:14-16<\/span> (twice), Dan 11:17<\/span>, Dan 11:20<\/span>, Dan 11:21<\/span>, Dan 11:25<\/span>, Dan 11:31<\/span>; also in Dan 12:1<\/span>, Dan 12:13<\/span>. In Dan 11:8<\/span> it is rendered continue; in Dan 11:15<\/span>, withstand; in the other cases, stand up, or simply stand. Gesenius says it is a word used particularly of a new prince, as in Dan 8:23<\/span>; Dan 11:2-3<\/span>, Dan 11:20<\/span>. He does not say that there would be none afterward, but he evidently designs to touch on the great and leading events respecting the Persian empire, so far as they would affect the Hebrew people, and so far as they would constitute prominent points in the history of the world. He does not, therefore, go into all the details respecting the history, nor does he mention all the kings that would reign. The prominent, the material points, would be the reign of those three kings; then the reign of the fourth, or Xerxes, as his mad expedition to Greece would lay the real foundation for the invasion of Persia by Alexander, and the overthrow of the Persian empire; then the life and conquests of Alexander, and then the wars consequent on the division of his empire at his death. The three kings here referred to were Cambyses, Smerdis, and Darius Hystaspis. As this communication was made in the third year of Cyrus Dan 10:1<\/span>, these would be the next in order; and by the fourth is undoubtedly meant Xerxes. There were several kings of Persia after Xerxes, as Artaxerxes Longimanus, Darius Nothus, Artaxerxes Mnemon, Ochus, and Darius Codomanus, but these are not enumerated because the real ground of the invasion of Alexander, the thing which connected him with the affairs of Pcrsia, did not occur in their reign, but it was the invasion of Greece by Xerxes.<\/P> And the fourth shall be far richer than they all – <\/B>That is, Xerxes – for he was the fourth in order, and the description here agrees entirely with him. He would of course inherit the wealth accumulated by these kings, and it is here implied that he would increase that wealth, or that, in some way, he would possess more than they all combined. The wealth of this king is mentioned here probably because the magnificence and glory of an Oriental monarch was estimated in a considerable degree by his possessions, and because his riches enabled him to accomplish his expedition into Greece. Some idea of the treasures of Xerxes may be obtained by considering,<\/P> (a) That Cyrus had collected a vast amount of wealth by the conquest of Lydia, and the subjugation of Croesus, its rich king, by the conquest of Asia Miner, of Armenia, and of Babylon – for it is said respecting him, I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, Isa 45:3<\/span> : see the note at that passage.<\/P> (b) That Cambyses increased that wealth which he inherited from Cyrus by his victories, and by his plundering the temples wherever he came. A single case occurring in his conquests may illustrate the amount of wealth which was accumulated. On his return from Thebes, in Egypt, he caused all the temples in that city to be pillaged and burned to the ground. But he saved from the flames gold to the amount of three hundred talents, and silver to the amount of two thousand and five hundred talents. He is also said to have carried away the famous circle of gold that encompassed the tomb of king Ozymandias, being three hundred and sixty-five cubits in circumference, on which were represented all the motions of the several constellations. – Universal History, iv. 140.<\/P> (c) This was further increased by the conquests of Darius Hystaspis, and by his heavy taxes on the people. So burdensome were these taxes, that he was called by the Persians, <\/SPAN><\/span> ho<\/I> kapelos<\/I> – the merchant, or hoarder. One of the first acts of Darius was to divide his kingdom into provinces for the purpose of raising tribute. During the reign of Cyrus, and indeed of Cambyses, there were no specific tributes; but presents were made to the sovereign. On account of these and similar innovations, the Persians call Darius a merchant, Cambyses a despot, but Cyrus a parent. – Herodotus, b. iii. lxxxix. A full account of the taxation of the kingdom, and the amount of the revenue under Darius, may be seen in Herodotus, b. iii. xc. – xcvi. The sum of the tribute under Darius, according to Herodotus, was fourteen thousand five hundred and sixty talents. Besides this sum received from regular taxation, Herodotus enumerates a great amount of gold and silver, and other valuable things, which Darius was accustomed to receive annually from the Ethiopians, from the people of Colchis, from the Arabians, and from India. All this vast wealth was inherited by Xerxes, the son and successor of Darius, and the fourth king here referred to.<\/P> Xerxes was full four years in making provision for his celebrated expedition into Greece. Of the amount of his forces, and his preparation, a full account may be seen in Herodotus, b. vii. Of his wealth Justin makes this remark: Si regem, spectes, divitias, non ducem, laudes: quarum tanta copia in regno ejus fuit, ut cum flumina multgtudine consumerentur, opes tamen regioe superessent<\/I>. – Hist. ii. 10. Compare Diod. Sic. x. c. 3; Pliny, Hist. Nat. xxiii. 10; AEl. xiii. 3; Herod. iii. 96; vii. 27-29. In the city of Celaenae, Herodotus says, there lived a man named Pythius, son of Atys, a native of Lydia, who entertained Xerxes and all his army with great magnificence, and who farther engaged to supply the king with money for the war. Xerxes on this was induced to inquire of his Persian attendants who this Pythius was, and what were the resources which enabled him to make these offers. It is the same, they replied, who presented your father Darius with a plane-tree and a vine of gold, and who, next to yourself, is the richest of mankind. – Herod. vii. 27.<\/P> And by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia – <\/B>That is, all his kingdom. He was enabled to do this by his great wealth – collecting and equipping, probably, the largest army that was ever assembled. The expedition of Xerxes against Greece is too well known to need to be detailed here, and no one can fail to see the applicability of this description to that invasion. Four years were spent in preparing for this expedition, and the forces that constituted the army were gathered out of all parts of the vast empire of Xerxes, embracing, as was then supposed, all the habitable world except Greece. According to Justin, the army was composed of seven hundred thousand of his own, and three hundred thousand auxiliaries. Diodorus Siculus makes it to be about three hundred thousand men; Prideaux, from Herodotus and others, computes it to have amounted, putting all his forces by sea and land together, to two million six hundred and forty-one thousand six hundred and ten men; and he adds that the servants, eunuchs, suttlers, and such persons as followed the camp, made as manymore, so that the whole number that followed Xerxes could not have been less than five million. – Connexions, pt. i. b. iv. vol. i. p. 410. Grotius reckons his forces at five million two hundred and eighty-two thousand. These immense numbers justify the expression here, and show with what propriety it is applied to the hosts of Xerxes. On the supposition that this was written after the event, and that it was history instead of prophecy, this would be the very language which would be employed.<\/P> <\/p>\n Verse 2<\/span>. There shall stand up yet three kings<\/B><\/I>] Gabriel had already spoken of Cyrus<\/I>, who was now reigning; and after him three<\/I> others should arise. These were,<\/P> 1. Cambyses<\/I>, the son of Cyrus.<\/P> 2. Smerdis<\/I>, the Magian, who was an impostor, who pretended to be another son of Cyrus. And,<\/P> 3. Darius<\/I>, the son of Hystaspes<\/I>, who married Mandane<\/I>, the daughter of Cyrus.<\/P> <\/P> Cambyses<\/I> reigned seven<\/I> years and five<\/I> months; Smerdis<\/I> reigned only seven<\/I> months; and Darius Hystaspes<\/I> reigned thirty-six<\/I> years.<\/P> <\/P> The fourth shall be far richer than<\/B><\/I> they <\/B>all<\/B><\/I>] This was Xerxes<\/I>, the son of Darius, of whom Justin<\/I> says. “He had so great an abundance of riches in his kingdom, that although rivers were dried up by his numerous armies, yet his wealth remained unexhausted.”<\/P> <\/P> He shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.<\/B><\/I>] His military strength was such, that Herodotus<\/I>, who lived in that time, informs us that his army amounted to five<\/I> millions, two hundred and<\/I> eighty-three<\/I> thousand, two hundred and twenty<\/I> men. Besides these, the Carthaginians furnished him with an army of three hundred<\/I> thousand<\/I> men, and a fleet of two hundred<\/I> ships. He led an army against the Greeks of eight hundred thousand<\/I> men, and twelve<\/I> hundred and seven<\/I> ships, with three banks of rowers<\/I> each. As he marched along, he obliged all the people of the countries through which he passed to join him.<\/P> <\/p>\n The truth: this is that thing which Daniel saith, Dan 10:1<\/span>, was revealed unto him, and was true, i.e. plain, without any obscurity, and should suddenly and certainly come to pass. <\/P> There shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; which notes their flourishing and strength; for after them that monarchy declined. These three are Cyrus, Smerdis, Darius Hystaspes. Others put Cambyses for Cyrus; others add Xerxes, who is added as the fourth in this same verse, and made more potent than all the other three, because his father Darius had gathered an incredible mass for him, and he also himself drove the same trade for six years together before he made his expedition against Greece. There were more kings of Persia besides those four, but they had no concern with the people of God; but those four had, either in hindering or helping the building of the temple, and therefore the angels instructions from God to Daniel were principally touching those four who are mentioned. <\/P> The fourth shall be far richer than they all: he had vast territories from India to Ethiopia; he had a navy of one thousand two hundred ships, and an army of eight hundred thousand, as Ctesias writes, but Herodotus speaks of a prodigious army that Xerxes had little short of five millions and a half, (five millions two hundred and eighty-three thousand,) and all against the realm of Greece, where he made incredible havoc at Thermopyle and Athens, as the Greek and Latin histories mention. <\/P> <\/p>\n 2. three kings in Persia<\/B>Cambyses,Pseudo-Smerdis, and Darius Hystaspes. (Ahasuerus, Artaxerxes, andDarius, in Ezr 4:6<\/span>; Ezr 4:7<\/span>;Ezr 4:24<\/span>). The Ahasuerus ofEsther<\/I> (see on Da 9:1<\/span>) isidentified with Xerxes, both in Greek history and in Scripture,appearing proud, self-willed, careless of contravening Persiancustoms, amorous, facile, and changeable (Da11:2<\/span>). <\/P> fourth . . . riches . . .against . . . Grecia<\/B>Xerxes, whose riches were proverbial.Persia reached its climax and showed its greatest power in hisinvasion of Greece, 480 B.C.After his overthrow at Salamis, Persia is viewed as politically dead,though it had an existence.<\/I> Therefore, Da11:3<\/span>, without noticing Xerxes’ successors, proceeds at once toAlexander, under whom, first, the third world kingdom, Grecia,reached its culmination, and assumed an importance as to the peopleof God. <\/P> stir up all<\/B>Four yearswere spent in gathering his army out of all parts of his vast empire,amounting to two millions six hundred and forty-one thousand men.[PRIDEAUX, Connexion,<\/I>1.4. l. 410].<\/P><\/p>\n And now will I show thee the truth<\/strong>,…. And nothing but the truth; what will most certainly come to pass, and may be depended on, even what is written in the book of God’s decrees, “the Scripture of truth”, and which would appear in Providence in later times; and this he proposed to deliver to him, not in figurative, dark, and obscure expressions, but clearly and plainly, in language easy to be understood:<\/p>\n behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia<\/strong>; which were Cyrus, who reigned alone after the death of Darius the Mede, his uncle; Cambyses, the son of Cyrus; and Darius Hystaspes. There was another between Cambyses and Darius, called Smerdis the magician, who reigned but seven months, and being an impostor is left out, as he is in Ptolemy’s canon; not that these were all the kings of Persia after Darius the Mede; for, according to the above canon, there reigned six more after them; but because these kings had a connection with the Jews, and under them their affairs had different turns and changes, respecting their restoration and settlement, and the building of their city and temple; as also because these kings “stood”, and the monarchy under them was strong and flourishing, whereas afterwards it began to decline; and chiefly it is for the sake of the fourth king that these are observed, who laid the foundation of the destruction of the Persian monarchy by the Grecians.<\/p>\n And the fourth shall be far richer than they all<\/strong>: this is Xerxes, who exceeded his predecessors in wealth and riches; enjoying what they by their conquests, or otherwise, had amassed together, to which he greatly added; Cyrus had collected a vast deal of riches from various nations, especially from Babylon: God gave him “the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places”, Isa 14:3<\/span>, Cambyses increased the store by his victories, and the plunder of temples wherever he came; out of the flames of which were saved three hundred talents of gold, and 2300 talents of silver, which he carried away, together with the famous circle of gold that encompassed the tomb of King Ozymandias d: and Darius, the father of Xerxes, laid heavy taxes upon the people, and hoarded up his money; hence he was called by the Persians e, the huckster or hoarder: and Xerxes came into it all, and so became richer than them all; of whom Justin says f<\/p>\n “si regem species; divitias, non ducem laudes: quarum tanta copia in regno ejus fuit, ut cum flumina multitudine consumerentur, opes tamen regiae superessent.”<\/p>\n And by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia<\/strong>; through his vast riches, which are the sinews of war, he collected a prodigious army out of all provinces, which he raised to make war against the Grecians; being moved to it by Mardonius, a relation of his, who was very ambitious of being at the head of a large army g; three years were spent in preparing for this expedition, and forces were gathered out of all parts of the then known habitable world; out of all the west, under Hamilcar, general of the Carthaginians, with whom he made a league; and out of all the east, under his own command: his army, according to Justin h, consisted of 700,000 of his own, and 300,000 auxiliaries; Diodorus Siculus i makes it much less, to be about 300,000 men; but Dr. Prideaux k, from Herodotus and others, computes, that putting all his forces together by sea and land, by the time he came to the straits of Thermopylae the number of them were 2,641,610 men; and Grotius, from the same writer reckons them 5,283,000, to which others add two hundred and twenty l with these he marched into Greece, where, after having done much mischief, he was shamefully defeated and obliged to retire, and was murdered by Artabanus the captain of his guards. The words may be rendered m, “he shall stir up all, even the realm of Grecia”; by the preparation he made, and the vast army he brought into the field, he raised all the cities and states of Greece to combine together to withstand him; and this step of his is what irritated the Grecians, and put them upon later attempts to avenge themselves on the Persians for this attack upon them; and which they never desisted from, till they had ruined the Persian empire, which they did under Alexander; and so he, in his letter to Darius, says n,<\/p>\n “your ancestors entered into Macedonia, and the other parts of Greece, and did us damage, when they had received no affront from us as the cause of it; and now I, created general of the Grecians, provoked by you, and desirous of avenging the injury done by the Persians, have passed over into Asia.”<\/p>\n And it is for the sake of this, the destruction of the Persian empire by Alexander, that this expedition of Xerxes is here hinted at; and to pave the way for the account of Alexander and his successors, in the following part of this prophecy.<\/p>\n d See the Universal History, vol. 5. p. 194. e Herodot. l. 3. sive Thalia, c. 89. f E Trogo, l. 2. c. 10. g Diodor. Sicul. Bibliothec. l. 11. par. 2. p. 3. Ed. Rhodoman. h E Trogo, l. 2. c. 10. i Ut supra, ( Diodor. Sicul. Bibliothec. l. 11.) par. 2. p. 2. k Connexion, &c. part 1. B. 4. p. 233, 234. l See the Universal History, vol. 5. p. 233. m “excitabit universos, nempe regnum” Graciae, Michaelis. n Apud Arrian. Exped. Alexand. l. 2.<\/p>\n The events of the nearest future – Daniel 11:2-20<\/p>\n The revelation passes quickly from Persia ( Dan 11:2<\/span><\/em>) and the kingdom of Alexander (Dan 11:3<\/span>, Dan 11:4<\/span>), to the description of the wars of the kingdoms of the south and the north, arising out of the latter, in which wars the Holy Land, lying between the two, was implicated. Regarding Persia it is only said that yet three kings shall arise, and that the fourth, having reached to great power by his riches, shall stir up all against the kingdom of Javan. Since this prophecy originates in the third year of the Persian king Cyrus (Dan 10:1<\/span>), then the three kings who shall yet ( ) arise are the three successors of Cyrus, viz., Cambyses, the pseudo-Smerdis, and Darius Hystaspes; the fourth is then Xerxes, with whom all that is said regarding the fourth perfectly agrees. Thus Hvernick, Ebrard, Delitzsch, Auberlen, and Kliefoth interpret; on the contrary, v. Lengerke, Maurer, Hitzig, and Kranichfeld will make the fourth the third, so as thereby to justify the erroneous interpretation of the four wings and the four heads of the leopard (Dan 7:6<\/span>) of the first four kings of the Persian monarchy, because, as they say, the article in necessarily requires that the<\/em> fourth is already mentioned in the immediately preceding statements. But the validity of this conclusion is not to be conceived; and the assertion that the O.T. knows only of four kings of Persia (Hitzig) cannot be established from Ezr 4:5-7<\/span>, nor from any other passage. From the naming of only four kings of Persia in the book of Ezra, since from the end of the Exile to Ezra and Nehemiah four kings had reigned, it in no way follows that the book of Daniel and the O.T. generally know of only four. Moreover, this assertion is not at all correct; for in Neh 12:22<\/span>, besides those four there is mention made also of a Darius, and to the Jews in the age of the Maccabees there was well known, according to 1 Macc. 1:1, also the name of the last Persian king, Darius, who was put to death by Alexander. If the last named, the king who by great riches (Dan 11:2<\/span>) reached to a higher power, is included among the three previously named, then he should have been here designated “the third.” The verb , to place oneself, then to stand, is used here and frequently in the following passages, as in Dan 8:23<\/span>, in the sense of to stand up<\/em> (= ), with reference to the coming of a new ruler. The gathering together of greater riches than all (his predecessors), agrees specially with Xerxes; cf. Herodot. iii. 96, vi. 27-29, and Justini Histor. ii. 2. The latter says of him: ” Divitias, non ducem laudes, quarum tanta copia in regno ejus fuit, ut, cum flumina multitudine consumerentur, opes tamen regiae superessent.” <\/em> <\/p>\n is the infinit<\/em>. or nomen actionis<\/em>, the becoming strong<\/em>; cf. 2Ch 12:1<\/span> with 2Ki 14:5<\/span> and Isa 8:11<\/span>. is not in apposition to it, “<\/em> according to his riches” (Hv.); but it gives the means by which he became strong. “Xerxes expended his treasures for the raising and arming of an immense host, so as by such (cf. Amo 6:13<\/span>) to conquer Greece” (Hitzig). is not in apposition to , all<\/em>, namely, the kingdom of Javan (Maurer, Kranichfeld). This does not furnish a suitable sense; for the thought that , “they all,” designates the divided states of Greece, and the apposition, “the kingdom of Javan,” denotes that they were brought by the war with Xerxes to form themselves into the unity of the Macedonian kingdom, could not possibly be so expressed. Moreover, the reference to the circumstances of the Grecian states is quite foreign to the context. is much rather a second, more remote object, and is to be interpreted, with Hvernick, either as the preposition with, so far as involves the idea of war, conflict, or simply, with Hitzig, as the accusative of the object of the movement (cf. Exo 9:29<\/span>, Exo 9:33<\/span>), to stir up, to rouse, after the kingdom of Javan, properly to make, to cause, that all ( = every one, cf. Psa 14:3<\/span>) set out towards. Daniel calls Greece , after the analogy of the Oriental states, as a united historical power, without respect to the political constitution of the Grecian states, not suitable to prophecy (Kliefoth).<\/p>\n From the conflict of Persia with Greece, the angel (Dan 11:3<\/span>) passes immediately over to the founder of the Grecian (Macedonian) world-kingdom; for the prophecy proceeds not to the prediction of historical details, but mentions only the elements and factors which constitute the historical development. The expedition of Xerxes against Greece brings to the foreground the world-historical conflict between Persia and Greece, which led to the destruction of the Persian kingdom by Alexander the Great. The reply of Alexander to Darius Codomannus (Arrian, Exped Alex<\/em>. ii. 14. 4) supplies a historical document, in which Alexander justifies his expedition against Persia by saying that Macedonia and the rest of Hellas were assailed in war by the Persians without any cause ( ), and that therefore he had resolved to punish the Persians. A deeper reason for this lies in this, that the prophecy closes the list of Persian kings with Xerxes, but not in this, that under Xerxes the Persian monarchy reached its climax, and partly already under him, and yet more after his reign, the fall of the kingdom had begun (Hvernick, Auberlen); still less in the opinion, proved to be erroneous, that the Maccabean Jew knew no other Persian kings, and confounded Xerxes with Darius Codomannus (v. Lengerke, Maurer, Hitzig).<\/p>\n We must now understand God’s intention in thus informing his servant Daniel of future events. He was clearly unwilling to gratify a vain curiosity, and he enlarged upon events necessary to be known, thus enabling the Prophet not only privately to rely on God’s grace, through this manifestation of his care for his Church, but also to exhort others to persevere in the faith. This chapter seems like a historical narrative under the form of an enigmatic description of events then future. The angel relates and places before his eyes occurrences yet to come to pass. We gather from this very clearly how God spoke through his prophets; and thus Daniel, in his prophetic character alone, is a clear proof to us of God’s peculiar favor towards the Israelites. Here the angel discusses, not the general state of the world, but first the Persian kingdom, then the monarchy of Alexander, and afterwards the two kingdoms of Syria and Egypt. From this we cleverly perceive how the whole discourse was directed to the faithful. God did not regard the welfare of other nations, but wished to benefit his Church, and principally to sustain the faithful under their approaching troubles. It was to assure them of God’s never becoming forgetful of his covenant, and of his so moderating the convulsions then taking place throughout the world, as to be ever protecting his people by his assistance. But we shall have to repeat this again, and even more than once, as we proceed. <\/p>\n First of all, the angel states, Three kings shall yet stand up in Persia With respect to the clause, Behold! I announce to you the truth, I explained in yesterday’s Lecture how frequently he confirmed his prophecy whenever he treated events of the greatest importance, which seemed almost incredible. I shall tell you the real truth; three kings shall stand up. The Jews are not only very ignorant of everything, but very stupid also- then they have no sense of shame, and are endued with a perverse audacity; for they think there were only three kings of Persia, and they neglect all history, and mingle and confound things perfectly clear and completely distinct. There were eight kings of Persia of whom no mention is made here. Why, then, does the angel say, three kings should stand up? This was the first year of Darius, as we saw before. Hence, in their number of kings, Cyrus, the first monarch, is included, together with his son Cambyses. When these two kings have been decided on, a new question will arise again; for some add Smerdis to Cambyses, though he was only an impostor; for the Magi falsely thrust him in as the son of Darius, for the purpose of acquiring the sovereignty to themselves. Thus he was acknowledged as king for seven months; but when the cheat was discovered he was slain by seven of the nobles, among whom was Darius the son of Hystaspes, and he, according to the common narrative, was created king by the consent of the others on the neighing of his horse. The variations of interpreters might hinder us from reading them, and so we must gather the truth from the event. For Smerdis, as I have stated, cannot be reckoned among the kings of Persia, as he was but an impostor. I therefore exclude him, following the prudence of others who have considered the point with attention. <\/p>\n We must now observe why Daniel mentions four kings, the fourth of whom, he states, should be very rich Cambyses succeeded Cyrus, who was reigning when the prophecy was uttered. He was always moving about to distant places; he scarcely allowed himself rest for a single year; he was exceedingly desirous of glory, insatiable in his ambition, and ever stirring up new wars. Cambyses, his son, who had slain his brother, died in Egypt, and yet added this country to the Persian Empire. Darius, the son of Hystaspes, succeeded, and Xerxes followed him. They are deceived who think Darius, the son of Hystaspes, is the fourth king; without doubt the Prophet meant Xerxes, who crossed the sea with a mighty army. he led with him 900,000 men; and, however incredible this may appear, all historians constantly affirm it. He was so puffed up with pride that he said he came to put fetters upon the Hellespont, while his army covered all the neighboring country. This is one point; the four kings were Cyrus, Cambyses, Darius the son of Hystaspes, and Xerxes, omitting Smerdis. We may now inquire why the angel limits the number to four, as the successor of Xerxes was Artaxerxes, or Darius Longimanus, the long-handed, and some others after him. This difficulty is solved by the following probable method, — Xerxes destroyed the power of the Persian Empire by his rashness; he escaped with the greatest disgrace, and was scarcely saved by the baseness of his flight. He brought away but few companions with him hastily in a small boat, and could not obtain a single transport, although the Hellespont had been previously covered with his ships. His whole army was almost cut to pieces, first at Thermopylee, then at Leuctra, and afterwards at other places. From that period the Persian Empire declined, for when its warlike glory was annihilated, the people gave themselves up to sloth and idleness, according to the testimony of Xenophon. Some interpreters expound the phrase, three kings stood up, of the flourishing period of the Persian monarchy: they take the words “stood up” emphatically, since from that period the nation’s power began to wane. For Xerxes on his return was hated by the whole people, first for his folly, then for his putting his brother to death, for his disgraceful conduct towards his sister, and for his other crimes; and as he was so loaded with infamy before his own people, he was slain by Artabanus, who reigned seven months. As the power of Persia was then almost entirely destroyed, or at least was beginning to decline, some interpreters state these three kings to stand up, and then add Xerxes as the fourth and the most opulent. But suppose we take the word “stood up” relatively, with respect to the Church? For the angel states that the Persian prince, Cambyses, stood before him, in an attitude of hostility and conflict. The angel seems rather to hint at the standing up of four kings of Persia, for the purpose of reminding the Jews of the serious evils and the grievous troubles which they must suffer under their sway. In this sense I interpret the verb “to stand,” referring it to the contests by which God harassed the Church until the death of Xerxes. For at that period, when the power of the Persians declined, a longer period of rest and relaxation was afforded to the people of God. This is the reason why the angel omits and passes over in silence all the kings from Artabanus to Darius the son of Arsaces; for Arsaces was the last king but one, and although Ochus reigned before him, we know from profane historians how his posterity were reduced to the lowest rank under the last Darius, whom Alexander conquered, as we shall see by and bye. For this reason I think this to be the genuine sense of the passage, — from Cyrus to Xerxes kings of Persia should stand up against the Israelites, and during the whole of that period the contests should be renewed, and the Jews would almost perish through despair under that continued series of evils. Some say, four kings should stand forth until all the Jews were led out; and we know this never to have been completed, for a small portion only returned. As to my own opinion, I am unwilling to contend with others, yet I hesitate not to enforce the angel’s wish to exhort all the pious to endurance, for he announced the standing up of these four kings, who should bring upon them various tribulations. As to the fourth king, the statement of this passage suits Xerxes exactly. The fourth, he says, shall be enriched with wealth; for the noun is of similar meaning with the verb, as they both spring from the same root. Truly enough Darius the son of Hystaspes determined to carry on war with Greece; he made the attempt but without success, especially at the battle of Marathon. He was cut off by sudden death when his treasures were prepared and many forces were collected He thus left the material of war for his son. Xerxes, in the flower of his age, saw every preparation for war made ready to his hands; he eagerly embraced the occasion, and gave no heed to sound advice. For, as we have already stated, he destroyed himself and the whole monarchy, not by a single slaughter only, but by four. And this power of raising an army of 900,000 men was no ordinary occurrence. If he had only carried with him across the sea 100,000 men, this would have been a large force. But his power of feeding such large forces while he passed through so many provinces, and then of passing them across the sea, exceeds the ordinary bounds of our belief. We are not surprised, then, at the angel’s predicting the extreme wealth of this king. <\/p>\n He adds, In his fortitude and in his riches he shall stir them all up against the realm of the Greeks. This was not accomplished by Darius the son of Hystaspes. According to my former statement, he attacked certain Grecian cities, but without producing confusion throughout the whole East, as Xerxes his successor did. As to the phrase, the kingdom of Javan, I willingly subscribe to their opinion who think the word equivalent to the Greek word Ionia. For Javan went forth in that direction, and dwelt there with his posterity in the Grecian territory, whence almost the whole of Greece obtained its present name. The whole Grecian nation is often called “Chittim,” and some see good reason for their being termed “Machetae,” from Chittim the son of Jayan, and thus by the addition of a letter we arrive at the Macedonians. For the conjecture is probable that this people were first called Maketae, and afterwards Macedonians. Without doubt, in this passage and in many others, Javan. is put for the whole of Greece, since Ionia was the portion of the country most celebrated in Judea and throughout the East generally. Xerxes then stirred up against the realm of Javan — meaning Greece — all the people of the East; for it is very well known how his empire spread far and wide in every direction. It follows: — <\/p>\n (2) The truth.<\/strong>Comp. Dan. 10:21<\/span>. This is the commencement of the revelation promised in Dan. 10:14<\/span>; and from this point till the end of the book the difficulties that have to be encountered in attempting an exposition are almost insuperable. It has been customary from the time of St. Jerome, if not from an earlier epoch, to explain most of what follows as referring to the Ptolemies and Seleucid. The difficulties which oppose this interpretation will be pointed out in the notes. It is a question whether, after all, the early interpretation is correct, and, if not, whether this revelation does not still await its complete fulfilment. The mere similarity which exists between certain things predicted here and what actually occurred in the times of the Ptolemies is not sufficient to limit the fulfilment of the prophecy to those times, still less to justify the assumption that the section before us is a history of what occurred from the disruption of the Greek Empire to the death of Antiochus. History repeats itself; and just as Antiochus (Dan. 8:23-25<\/span>) is a type of Antichrist (Dan. 7:21<\/span>), so the events and political combinations which preceded Antiochus may be regarded as typical of what will occur before the coming of the Messiah and the general resurrection, with a prediction of which (Dan. 12:2-3<\/span>) this revelation concludes.<\/p>\n Three kings.<\/strong>It is hard to say who these were. Cyrus being on the throne already, it is most probable that his three successors are intendedCambyses, Darius, and Xerxes. Those four kings appear to have been selected whose influence was most prominent in its bearings upon Israel. Xerxes is called the fourth king because the reckoning dates from Cyrus, and the short reign of the Pseudo Smerdis is not taken into account. Not only do the riches of Xerxes point him out as the last king, but also his conduct towards Greece may be correctly described as stirring up against himself the realm of Grecia.<\/p>\n Against<\/strong> . . .The passage gives better sense if translated, he shall stir up all, the kingdom of Greece,<\/em> that is, amongst those stirred up the kingdom of Greece is most prominent. It should be noticed that at the time of the invasion of Europe by Xerxes, Greece was in no sense a kingdom. Such language is incompatible with an authorship during the Maccabee period.<\/p>\n 2<\/strong>. <\/strong> Three kings in Persia <\/strong> There were really a dozen kings who ruled over the Medo-Persian empire; but Daniel is only concerned with those who had especial influence over the destinies of the Jewish people. Even Prince sees from Dan 9:25<\/span>, etc., that the writer of Daniel knew that the Persian period lasted much longer than the reigns of only four kings. The names of the Persian kings to which the Bible refers as materially affecting the Jews are Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes, and Artaxerxes. The recent discoveries of Hilprecht show that Thomson’s supposition that Artaxerxes was merely a title, and not a personal name, cannot be longer maintained. This passage may, however, only mean that there will be three kings after Cyrus, the last of whom shall be this rich king whom almost all commentators identify as Xerxes. The three are mentioned merely to identify the fourth. The succession of kings ran: Cyrus, Cambyses, Darius Hystaspes, Xerxes. Many expositors have counted Artaxerxes as the king preceding Xerxes, and have tried to account for the inexactness in number by calling the “four” symbolical; but Dr. Hilprecht has recently shown that Artaxerxes followed Xerxes and preceded Darius II. Why Xerxes should be selected for special mention is explained by the romance attached to him because of his extraordinary wealth and the defeats inflicted upon his army of half a million men by the Grecian heroes of Thermopylae and Marathon. Every reader of the prophecy for centuries afterward would identify this king, far richer than they all<\/strong>, as Xerxes. Multimillionaires were not as common in those days as now. And by his strength<\/strong>, etc. Rather, as R.V., “and when he is waxed strong through his riches,” etc.<\/p>\n The Kings Of Persia.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n “And now I will show you the truth. Behold there will stand up yet three kings in Persia, and the fourth will be far richer than all of them, and when he has established himself strongly through his riches he will stir up all against the realm of Greece.”<\/p>\n ‘And now I will show you the truth.’ That is the truth as indelibly inscribed in the writing of truth (Dan 10:21<\/span>), which must therefore come about.<\/p>\n The fourth king, richer than all, who becomes excessively rich and powerful, and stirs up all (either all the resources of the empire, or all peoples from his empire) against Greece is undoubtedly Xerxes. ‘There will stand up’ suggests that Cyrus the current king was not in mind. Thus the four would be Cambyses, Smerdis, Darius Hystapsis and Xerxes.<\/p>\n The purpose of the verse is to bring out the growth of the Persian empire to its maximum point and the result that followed, the first major invasion of Greece. It is really preparatory to the details given of the Greek empire. There is no intention of outlining Persian history. This is not simply an exercise in foretelling the future, it is depicting the fulfilment of God’s purposes. The idea is to show the steps of growth up to the fourth massive empire previously mentioned, but not to depict all the details. Certainly it is patterned on the previous visions. That is why only four kings are mentioned and Cyrus, as the reigning king, is omitted. (Had he been needed in order to make up four he would have been included). The fourth king, like the fourth empire, is the potent one from a world point of view.<\/p>\n Daniel is very much aware that he could not (in his schema) be the ‘fifth’ king, for that would make him the covenant king. In the same way in the previous visions there could not be five empires, until, that is, the arrival of the covenant empire, for five is the number of covenant. Xerxes had to be the fourth king, however the number was to be obtained. He was from the world’s viewpoint ‘ the<\/em> king’ as far as Persia was concerned. Only he was powerful enough to instigate the invasion of Greece.<\/p>\n His failure to mention any Persian king after Xerxes was not due to lack of knowledge but the requirements of his schema. Kings who followed him were irrelevant for Xerxes had made the move that would introduce the Greek empire. He was ‘the fourth king’ who included all that followed.<\/p>\n Xerxes invaded Greece in 480 BC, with a huge army, but he suffered defeat and never recovered, for after he had subdued virtually all of Greece down to the Isthmus of Corinth, including the reduction to ashes of the city of Athens, his navy was thoroughly worsted by the united Greek fleet at the Battle of Salamis in 480 BC. He himself retreated leaving his general Mardonius to see to affairs, and he was crushed in the following year by the allied forces of the Greeks at the battle of Plataea. All subsequent attempts to crush Greece also failed. In Xerxes was summed up all Persia’s future against Greece.<\/p>\n Dan 11:2<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>There shall stand up yet three kings<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> They were to stand up yet; <\/em>that is to say, after Cyrus, the founder of the empire, who was then reigning. These three kings, <\/em>were Cambyses, the son of Cyrus; Smerdis the Magian, who pretended to be another son of Cyrus, but was really an impostor; and Darius, the son of Hystaspes, who married the daughter of Cyrus. The<\/em> fourth, <\/em>who shall be far richer than they all, <\/em>was Xerxes, the son of Darius, of whom Justin remarks, that “He had so great an abundance of riches <\/em>in his kingdoms, that though rivers were dried up by his numerous armies, yet his wealth remained unexhausted.” Herodotus informs us, that Pythius the Lydian entertained Xerxes and all his army, and offered him two thousand talents of silver, and three millions nine hundred and ninety-three thousand pieces of gold, with the stamp of Darius, towards defraying the charges of the war; but the king, so far from wanting supplies, rewarded Pythius for his liberality, and presented him with seven thousand darics, <\/em>to make his number a complete round sum of four millions. Each of these darics <\/em>was worth more than a guinea of our money. See Newton. <\/p>\n And by his strength, <\/em><\/strong>&c.<\/strong> Herodotus, who lived in that age, assures us, that Xerxes’ army, which was collected from various parts of the continent, amounted to five millions two hundred and eighty-three thousand two hundred and twenty men: and, not content with stirring up the east, he engaged the Carthaginians in his alliance, who raised an army of Africans and mercenaries from Spain, Gaul, and Italy, which consisted of three hundred thousand men, besides a fleet of two hundred ships. Xerxes was the principal author of the long wars between the Greeks and Persians; and, being the last king of Persia who invaded Greece, is mentioned last. The Grecians in their turn invaded Asia: and, Xerxes’ expedition being the most memorable on one side, as Alexander’s was on the other, the reigns of these two kings are not improperly connected together, though no less than nine kings intervened betwixt them. See Newton. Houbigant renders this clause, And, relying on his riches, he shall stir up all things against the kingdoms of Greece.<\/em> <\/p>\n Dan 11:2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than [they] all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.<\/p>\n Ver. 2. And now I will show thee the truth.<\/strong> ] The plain, naked truth, in proper and downright terms, dealing with thee more like a historian than a prophet. Truth is, like our first parents, most beautiful when naked. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia.<\/strong> ] Three besides Darius, viz., Cyrus, Cambyses, and Darius Hystaspis; for as for Smerdis or the Magus, who took upon him to be the son of Cyrus, and usurped the throne after Cambyses for six months, the holy angel holds him not worth naming. a<\/em> <\/p>\n <\/p>\n And the fourth shall be far richer than they all.<\/strong> ] This was Xerxes, who was called the hoarder of his kingdom, like as his father Darius had been called the huckster, regni caupo,<\/em> the huckster of the kingdom, for his unmeasurable riches gathered out of all the East, and prepared for the war against Greece. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n And when he shall be strengthened by his riches.<\/strong> ] Which were never true to those that trusted them. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n He shall stir up all.<\/strong> ] He shall bring into the field a million of men, and cover the seas with his ships, thinking to bear down all before him; but was shamefully defeated by the Grecians, and forced in a small fishing boat to get back into Asia, where, falling into inordinate lust and cruelty, he was killed by Artabanus, and left this war hereditary to his successors, until the ruin of the Persian kingdom by great Alexander, of whom in the next verse. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n a<\/em> Herodot, in Thalia.<\/p>\n NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Dan 11:2-4<\/p>\n 2And now I will tell you the truth. Behold, three more kings are going to arise in Persia. Then a fourth will gain far more riches than all of them; as soon as he becomes strong through his riches, he will arouse the whole empire against the realm of Greece. 3And a mighty king will arise, and he will rule with great authority and do as he pleases. 4But as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out toward the four points of the compass, though not to his own descendants, nor according to his authority which he wielded, for his sovereignty will be uprooted and given to others besides them.<\/p>\n Dan 11:2 And now I will tell you the truth This is an idiom which means that the message is trustworthy and accurate (cf. Dan 8:26; Dan 10:1; Dan 10:21). See fuller note at Dan 10:1.<\/p>\n three more kings This may refer to the last three before Xerxes I, Cambyses II (530-522 B.C.), Pseudo-Smerdis (522- 521 B.C.) and Darius I (521-486 B.C.). We learn from history that there were nine kings in the series, but v. 2 summarizes 200 years (538-331 B.C.) of Persian history (cf. A Handbook on the Book of Daniel, UBS, p. 280).<\/p>\n Then a fourth Jerome was the first to assert that this refers to Xerxes I (486-465 B.C.), which is the Greek name for Esther’s husband, Ahasuerus. He planned a campaign into Greece for over 4 years. When he finally attacked Greece with a much superior force, he was defeated by the well-organized Greek army. Heroditus says that he invaded with over one million men. That Persia could be defeated would have surprised everyone who lived in the Persian Empire.<\/p>\n will gain far more riches than all of them; as soon as he becomes strong through his riches This apparently refers to Xerxes I (his Greek name), who planned and attacked Greece with all his resources.<\/p>\n NASBhe will arouse the whole empire<\/p>\n NKJV, NRSVhe shall stir up all<\/p>\n TEV —–<\/p>\n NJBhe will make war<\/p>\n The NKJV and NRSV are closest to the Hebrew text, which leaves ambiguous who the all refers to.<\/p>\n 1. the Greek empire (NAB, Moffatt translation)<\/p>\n 2. the Persian empire (NASB)<\/p>\n 3. everyone against Greece (NIV)<\/p>\n Dan 11:3<\/p>\n NASB, NKJV,<\/p>\n NJBand a mighty king will arise<\/p>\n NRSVa warrior king shall arise<\/p>\n TEVa heroic king will appear<\/p>\n The Hebrew ADJECTIVE (BDB 150) is often used of God (cf. Deu 10:17; Neh 9:23; Isa 10:21; Jer 32:18). It described Nimrod, the founder of Babylon, as a mighty hunter (cf. Gen 10:9). It described the Messiah in Isa 9:5. Its cognate root in Arabic has the connotation of one who magnifies himself or a tyrant, which fits Alexander II. The next VERB and OBJECT are the same word (BDB 605-606, KB 647) rule and great rule, which describes the amazing exploits of Alexander.<\/p>\n There is a time gap between Dan 11:2, the closing of the Persian Empire (the second kingdom of chapters 2 and 7, cf. Dan 8:20) and Dan 11:3, the coming of the Greek Empire (the third kingdom of chapters 2 and 7, cf. Dan 8:21).<\/p>\n NASBhe will rule with great authority<\/p>\n NKJV, NRSVwho shall rule with great dominion<\/p>\n TEVhe will rule over a great empire<\/p>\n NJBgovern a vast empire<\/p>\n This idiom is repeated in Dan 11:5, where it refers to the extent of the reign. Brown, Driver, Briggs see 2Ki 20:13 and Isa 39:2 as parallel (BDB 606).<\/p>\n NASBdo as he pleases<\/p>\n NKJVdo according to his will<\/p>\n NRSVtake action as he pleases<\/p>\n TEVdo whatever he wants<\/p>\n NJBdo whatever he pleases<\/p>\n This is the essence of fallen humanity, which characterizes all the kingdoms of Daniel (see full note at Dan 8:4). The book of Daniel accentuates the supposed sovereignty of these worldly leaders with the true sovereignty of YHWH, as Dan 11:4 demonstrates (three Niphal VERBS).<\/p>\n Dan 11:4 as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out Alexander the Great conquered the known world of his day and died of a fever at the age of 32 in Babylon (323 B.C.).<\/p>\n the four points of the compass Literally this is the four winds of heaven which is a metaphor for the world (cf. Dan 7:2; Dan 8:8). Alexander’s generals (i.e., the twelve satraps of his kingdom) divided his domain. However, four of them became dominant powers:<\/p>\n 1. Cassander – Macedonia and Greece<\/p>\n 2. Lysimicus – Thrace<\/p>\n 3. Seleucus I – Syria and Babylon<\/p>\n 4. Ptolemy I – Egypt and Palestine<\/p>\n 5. Antigonus – part of Asia Minor<\/p>\n However, Antigonus was killed very early in this power struggle.<\/p>\n not his own descendants Alexander the Great had two sons, Hercules by Barsine, the daughter of Darius I, and Alexander III by Roxana (daughter of the Scythian king). Both of them were assassinated.<\/p>\n and given to others besides them The others could refer to<\/p>\n 1. his descendants<\/p>\n 2. smaller kings and kingdoms in his empire<\/p>\n 3. the four major generals<\/p>\n now. Calling attention to the then present time (424 B.C.) as being distinct from Dan 11:1, which refers to what took place two years before. <\/p>\n yet: i.e. in the then immediate future. <\/p>\n three kings in Persia. Cambyses, the pseudo-Smerdis, and Darius Hystaspes. See App-57. But ancient histories “contain much that is admittedly fabulous” (Encycl. Brit, 11th ed., vol. 21, p. 210), and the commentaries based on them differing among themselves are therefore not to be relied on. We know from this verse that there were three, after Cyrus, and a fourth. Whoever he was, he was succeeded by the “mighty king” of Dan 11:4 (Alexander the Great). <\/p>\n by his strength through his riches. Some codices, and five early printed editions, read “by strengthening himself in his riches he will stir up”. <\/p>\n Dan 11:2<\/p>\n Dan 11:2 And nowH6258 will I shewH5046 thee the truth.H571 Behold,H2009 there shall stand upH5975 yetH5750 threeH7969 kingsH4428 in Persia;H6539 and the fourthH7243 shall be far richerH6238 H1419 H6239 than they all:H4480 H3605 and by his strengthH2393 through his richesH6239 he shall stir upH5782 allH3605 againstH854 the realmH4438 of Grecia.H3120 <\/p>\n Dan 11:2<\/p>\n And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.<\/p>\n “And now” <\/p>\n Daniel’s heavenly visitor bookended the starting point of this vision from the first year of Darius the Mede and then in two words jumps forward to the very moment in history when he was standing in front of Daniel. There was no need for this heavenly visitor to say anything about the events between Darius and then because Daniel lived through that and knew all he needed to know. This heavenly visitor had no reason to expound on things already known and chose not to do so. <\/p>\n “Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia”<\/p>\n From this point forward there will be three more kings over Persia with the fourth one, counting Cyrus, who had enough prominence to receive more than a passing mention which makes it possible for us today to pinpoint his identity from the historical accounts. At the time of this vision Cyrus the Great was in his third year as the supreme king of the Persian empire (Dan 10:1). The three Persian kings yet to rise to power are:<\/p>\n 1) Cambyses II, reigned from 530 to 522 BC. He was the son of Cyrus the Great (r. 559-530 BC), founder of the Persian Empire and its first dynasty. His grandfather was Cambyses I, king of Anshan. Following Cyrus’ conquests of the Near East and Central Asia, Cambyses further expanded the Persian empire into Egypt before his death in 522 BC. <\/p>\n 2) Darius I (Darius the Great), who reigned from 522 to 486 BC. He was the third Zoroastrian king of kings of the Persian Empire, also known as the Achaemenid Empire. Darius held the empire at its peak which included Egypt, and parts of Greece. Darius ascended the throne by assassinating Bardiya who was a son of Cyrus the Great and was seeking the throne of Persia himself. Darius expanded the Persian empire by moving against what is modern Europe today. In history this is known as the First Persian invasion of Greece.<\/p>\n Starting with the Scythians, Darius conquered Scythia, Thrace and many cities of the northern Aegean, while Macedonia submitted voluntarily. The Asiatic Greeks and Greek islands had submitted to Persian rule by 510 BCE.<\/p>\n There were certain Greeks who were pro-Persian which were largely grouped at Athens. This improved Greek-Persian relations as Darius opened his court and treasuries to the Greeks that wanted to serve him. These Greeks served as soldiers, artisans, statesmen and mariners for Darius. However, Greek fear of the Persians becoming strong and overpowering them led them to distrust and to resist Darius. <\/p>\n Aristagoras organized the Ionian revolt, Eretria and Athens supported him by sending ships to Ionia and burning Sardis. Persian forces were sent to end the revolt by force and resulted in the the Persian reoccupation of Ionian and Greek islands. However, anti-Persian parties gained power in Athens expelled the pro-Persian leaders. Darius responded by sending a group of troops led by his son-in-law across the Hellespont. However, the battle was lost due to a violent storm and harassment by Thracians.<\/p>\n Darius was determined to punish the anti-Persian forces in Athens and he sent a second army consisting of 20,000 men under Datis who captured Eretria and moved onwards to Marathon. In 490, at the Battle of Marathon, the Persians were defeated by a heavily armed Athenian army with 9,000 men who were supported by 600 Plataeans and 10,000 lightly armed soldiers led by Miltiades. The defeat at Marathon marked the end of the First Persian invasion of Greece. This happened late in the reign of Darius and before he set out on this effort, he was required by Persian law to name his successor, Xerxes 1 who was his son by Atossa who was a daughter of Cyrus the Great.<\/p>\n Darius organized the empire, by dividing it into provinces and placing governors to govern it. He organized a new monetary system, along with making Aramaic the official language of the empire. Darius also worked on construction projects throughout the empire, focusing on Susa, Babylon, and Egypt. Darius also created a codification of laws for Egypt. <\/p>\n This Darius is the king who finally put an end to the opposition against the rebuilding of the temple and re-issued the original decree of his grandfather Cyrus to build the house of God in Jerusalem (Ezra 6). Darius released the remaining temple vessels from the Persian treasury which had originally been confiscated by Nebuchadnezzar and he further assisted in financing the rebuilding by pledging some of the tax money from Tattenai, the Persian governor of the provinces in Samaria. These were the same Samarians who were heading the resistance against the Jews in the rebuilding of the temple and now their tribute money was ordered to be used to help finance the rebuilding the temple. <\/p>\n Darius died in October of 486 BC and was buried in an elaborate cliffside tomb at modern day Naqsh-e Rustam, Iran. He was succeeded by his son Xerxes I. <\/p>\n 3) Xerxes I (Ahasuerus of Esther and son of Darius the Great) who reigned from 486 until his assassination in 465 BC. Ahasuerus was the third king yet to stand up and the fourth king in the Persian empire under the dynasty established by Cyrus the Great. These four kings are known in history as Zoroastrian kings of the Achamenid Empire. The word “Zoroastrian” relates to their religion which is called “Zoroastrianism”. These were Persian kings at the height of the Persian empire as a world power.<\/p>\n Ahasuerus was a king of vast wealth. When he rose to power, his father, Darius, had already initiated efforts to conquer Greece and had run into major difficulties. When Ahasuerus took power, he was determined to carry out his father’s initiative against Greece and he began the Second Invasion of Greece. Ahasuerus spent 10 years organizing and planning this invasion which involved the cooperation of some 70 city-states in the campaign. He prepared an enormous army and navy, invaded Greece and encountered total failure. He suffered great losses at Thermopylae, Salamis (480 BC) and at Plataea and Mycale. The Battle of Thermopylae was the site of the famous Spartan soldiers who with 700 Thespians, 400 Thebans, fought face to face with the Persian army which supposedly numbered close to a million men strong. <\/p>\n With these defeats at the hands of the Greeks, the invasion was ended and Persian power in the region was broken. The Greeks, motivated by the threat of future invasions moved to the offensive and eventually expelled the Persians from Europe completely in about 449 BC.<\/p>\n “and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.”<\/p>\n No king of the Persian Empire better fits this description than Ahasuerus. He was wealthy, he used his wealth and his strength to amass a huge force against the realm of the Greeks and he was the fourth great Persian king after the overthrow of Babylon when Persia became a world power. Daniel’s vision has now made it to the time when Ahasuerus was “stirring up all against the realm of Grecia”. This is roughly 470 to 480 BC. <\/p>\n As is normal with apocalyptic language, we arrive at a significant jump through history. Apocalyptic language rarely lays all the elements out in Chronological order and it also makes skips in time which is the case here. There is no accounting of history between Ahasuerus and Alexander the Great. Ahasuerus was not the last king of the Persian empire to be followed immediately by Alexander. So between verse 2 and verse three, we skip ahead in time till 336 BC when Alexander “stood up” or came to power. <\/p>\n The spirit of prophecy here returns to that which more immediately concerned Daniel and his royal masters–the near future of the empire in which he was so great a personage. Four kings were yet to follow in Media-Persia. Then will come Alexander the “mighty king” of Grecia (Dan 11:3). The division of Alexander’s empire into four parts (Dan 11:4) as already predicted Dan 8:22 is foretold. The troublous course of affairs in two parts of the disintegrated Alexandrian empire, Syria and Egypt, is then traced down to Dan 11:20. Here Antiochus Epiphanes, the “little horn” of Daniel 8, occupies the vision down to Dan 11:36. His pollution of the sanctuary is again mentioned. (Cf) (See Scofield “Dan 8:9”). From Dan 11:36 the interpretation is of the final “little horn” Dan 7:8; Dan 7:24-26 See Scofield “Dan 11:35”. <\/p>\n three kings Ahasuerus, Ezr 4:6, Artaxerxes, Ezr 4:7, and Darius called “Hystaspes” Ezr 4:24. <\/p>\n fourth Xerxes, who invaded Greece BC 483-480. <\/p>\n will I: Dan 8:26, Dan 10:1, Dan 10:21, Pro 22:21, Amo 3:7, Joh 10:35, Joh 18:37, Joh 18:38, Rev 21:5 <\/p>\n three: These were, Cambyses, son of Cyrus; Smerdis the Magian imposter; and Darius Hystaspes. Ezr 4:5, Ezr 4:6 <\/p>\n far: Psa 73:6, Psa 73:7 <\/p>\n stir: Herodotus says the army of Xerxes consisted of 5,283,220 men, besides the Carthaginians, consisting of 300,000 men, and 200 ships. Dan 11:25, Dan 7:5, Dan 8:4 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Ecc 3:14 – nothing Eze 27:13 – Javan Dan 2:32 – breast Dan 2:39 – another kingdom Dan 8:20 – General Dan 10:20 – the prince of Grecia<\/p>\n Dan 11:2. We now come to the grand drama of the nations that was referred to by the angel after he had made the necessary preliminary’ explanations to Daniel, and while he was stiil in the presence of the prophet on the bank of the Tigris River. The truth refers to that mentioned as “scripture of truth in the last verse Of the preceding chapter. No other scripture goes into as many details as does the present chapter, but the prophecy as a whole was seen by inspired eyes, and made known by the prophets in various places and under diverse figures. Stand up yet three kings in Persia. At the time this speech by the angel was made, Cyrus and Darius were the joint rulers of the empire. The three to follow were unimportant and are passed over with the brief numerical statement italicized, to bring the prophecy down to the fourth king in this enumeration, who was to be a very important king. The pronoun fftee refers to Daniel Lo whom the angel was delivering this prophecy. The prediction is that this fourth king was to be rich and strong and finally would cause such a stir among the nations of the world that he would bring the powerful kingdom of Greece (destined to be the third world power) into a hostile attitude because of the encroachments of Persia upon that realm. In this chapter there are no less than 20 characters referred to, either directly or otherwise, and it will be helpful if not necessay for the understanding of the great passage to have the history that confirms the predictions. Hence I shall make numerous quotations from time to lime from authentic sources for the information of the reader. The fourth king Of this verse was XERXES I. and history has this to say of him: For eight years alt Asia was astir with the work of preparation [for the expedition against Greece]. Levies were made upon all the provinces that acknowledged the authority of the Great King [Xerxes I], from India to Macedonia, from the regions of the Oxus to those of the Upper Nile, From alt the maritime states upon the Mediterranean were demanded vast contingents of war galleys, transport ships, and naval stores. While these land and sea forces were being gathered and equipped, gigantic works were in progress on the Thracian coast and on the Hellespont to insure the safety and facilitate the march of the coming hosts.-MYERS Ancient History, page 191.<\/p>\n “Xerxes thus levied his army searching out every region of the continent. For from the reduction of Egypt, he was employed four whole years in as sembing his forces, and providing things necessary for the expedition. In the course of the fifth year be began his march with a vast multitude of men. For of the expeditions with which we are acquainted, this was by far the greatest, so that that of Darius against the Scythians appears nothing in comparison with this, – HERODOTUS, Book 7, Sections 19. 20,<\/p>\n “Xerxes, in the four years which followed on the reduction of Egypt, continued incessantly to make the most gigantic preparations for his intended attack upon Greece, and among them included all the precautions which a wise foresight could devise in order to ward off every conceivable peril). A general order was issued to all satraps throughout the Empire, calling on them to levy the utmost force of their province tor the new war; while, as the equipment of Oriental troops depends greatly on the purchase and distribution of arms by their commander, a rich reward was promised to the satrap whose contingent should appear at tbe appointed place in the most gallant array. , . . His army Is said to have accompanied him; but more probably it joined him in the spring, flocking in, contingent after contingent, from the various provinces of his vast Empire. Fortynine nations, according to Herodotus, served under his standard.- Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies, Volume 3, Chapter 7, pages 448, 452,<\/p>\n “All these expeditions, and any others, if there have been any besides them, are not to be compared with this one. For what nation did not Xerxes lead out of Asia against Greece? What stream, being drunk, did not fail him, except that of great rivers. Some supplied ships; others were ordered to furnish men for the infantry, from others cavalry were required, from others transports for horses, together with men to serve in the army; others to furnish long shipB for the bridges, and others provisions and vessels.- Herodotus, Book 7, Section 21.<\/p>\n “The Decline and Fall of the Persian Empire.-The power and supremacy of the Persian monarchy passed away with the reign of Xerxes. The last one hundred and forty years of the existence of the empire was a time of weakness and anarchy, and presents nothing that needs claim our attention in this place. In the year 334 B.C., Alexander the Great, king of Macedonia, led a small army of Greeks and Macedonians across the Hellespont intent upon the conquest of Asia. His succeeding movements and the estab ishment of the shortlived Macedonian monarchy upon the ruins of the Persian Empire are matters that properly belong to Grecian history, and will be related at a later stage of our story.” -MYERS’ Ancient History, page 94.<\/p>\n From Xerxes we have to date at once the decline of the Empire in respect to territorial greatness and military strength, and likewise its deterioration in regard to administrative vigor and national spirit.”-Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies, Volume 3, Chapter 7, Page 471. There were some other rulers in Persia, but they were Inferior to the one just seen in these quotations and will not claim our attention at this time.<\/p>\n Dan 11:2. And now I will show thee the truth Now I will show thee future things plainly, not enigmatically, or under symbolical representations. Here this chapter should begin: what goes before should be added to the former chapter. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia According to the Canon, there were nine kings of the Persian empire from Cyrus to Codomanus, besides others, who, falling within a year, are not therein mentioned. Interpreters have differed, therefore, in pointing out the kings that are here meant, or in fixing the commencement of the Scripture, or writing, of truth, mentioned Dan 10:21. But as the vision was revealed to Daniel in the third year of Cyrus, it is most natural to trace its beginning from that time; and then the three kings yet to stand up, or after the then reigning monarch, will be Cambyses, or the Ahasuerus, and Smerdis, or the Artaxerxes, of Ezr 4:6-7, and Darius Hystaspes; the second of whom, being a magian usurper, that reigned scarce eight months, according to Herodotus, is not in the Canon. Wintle. And the fourth shall be far richer than they all That is, Xerxes, the son and successor of Hystaspes, who had inherited great riches from his father, according to schylus, and had amassed much more. Of him Justin truly remarks, If you consider this king, you may praise his riches, not the general; of which there was so great abundance in his kingdom, that when rivers were dried up by his army, yet his wealth remained unexhausted. Pythius, the Lydian, (according to Herodotus, book 7. sec. 27,) was at that time the richest subject in the world. He generously entertained Xerxes and all his army, and proffered him two thousand talents of silver, and three millions nine hundred and ninety-three thousand pieces of gold, with the stamp of Darius, toward defraying the charges of the war. But Xerxes was so far from wanting supplies, that he rewarded Pythius for his liberality, and presented him with seven thousand darics, to make up his number a complete round sum of four millions. Each of these darics was worth better than a guinea of our money. Many great and rich provinces, as India, Thrace, Macedonia, and the islands of the Ionian sea, were added by Darius to the Persian empire. And by his strength he shall stir up all Both subjects and allies; against the realm of Grecia Xerxess expedition into Greece is one of the most memorable adventures in ancient history. Herodotus (book 7. sec. 20, 21) affirms, that Xerxes, in raising his army, searched every place of the continent, and it was the greatest army that ever was brought into the field; for what nation was there, says he, that Xerxes led not out of Asia into Greece? Herodotus lived in that age; and he, in the fore-mentioned place, recounts with great exactness the various nations of which Xerxess army was composed, and computes that the whole number of horse and foot, by land and sea, out of Asia and Europe, soldiers and followers of the camp, amounted to five millions two hundred and eighty-three thousand two hundred and twenty men. Nor was Xerxes content with stirring up the East, but was for stirring up the West likewise, (see Diod. Sic., book 11.,) and engaged the Carthaginians in his alliance, that, while he and his army overwhelmed Greece, they might fall upon the Greek colonies in Sicily and Italy: and the Carthaginians, for this purpose, not only raised all the forces they could in Africa, but also hired a great number of mercenaries in Spain, and Gaul, and Italy; so that their army consisted of three hundred thousand men, and their fleet of two hundred ships. Thus did Xerxes stir up all against the realm of Grecia: and after him no mention is here made of any other king of Persia. It is to be noted, says Jerome, that the prophet, having enumerated four kings of the Persians after Cyrus, slips over nine, and passes to Alexander; for the prophetic spirit did not care to follow the order of history, but only to touch upon the most famous events. Xerxes was the principal author of the long wars and inveterate hatred between the Grecians and Persians; and as he was the last king of Persia who invaded Greece, he is mentioned last. The Grecians then, in their turn, invaded Asia; and Xerxess expedition being the most memorable on one side, as Alexanders was on the other, the reigns of these two are not improperly connected together. Bishop Newton.<\/p>\n Dan 11:2. three kings: probably Cyrus (538529 B.C.), Cambyses (529522 B.C.), Darius Hystaspis (522485 B.C.).the fourth: Xerxes (485465 B.C.) who invaded Greece. An account of the immense wealth and power of Xerxes is given by the Greek historian Herodotus (vii. 2099).stir up: an allusion to the well-known expedition of Xerxes against Greece.<\/p>\n 11:2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet {b} three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than [they] all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up {c} all against the realm of Grecia.<\/p>\n (b) Of which Cambyses that now reigned was the first, the second Smerdes, the third Darius the son of Hystaspis, and the fourth Xerxes, who all were enemies to the people of God, and stood against them.<\/p>\n (c) For he raised up all the east countries to fight against the Grecians, and even though he had in his army 900,000 men, yet in four battles he was defeated, and fled away with shame.<\/p>\n 2. The near future 11:2-35<\/span><\/p>\n The interpreting angel now explained the long anticipated (since Dan 10:1) revelation about the future that involved Daniel’s people, the Jews. The first part of it concerns events preceding Messiah’s first advent (Dan 11:2-35), and the second part, events preceding Messiah’s second advent (Dan 11:36 to Dan 12:4). [Note: The primary sources of information about Daniel’s predicted events that preceded Messiah’s first advent (<\/span>Dan 11:2-35), apart from Daniel himself, are the second-century B.C. Greek historian Polybius, the apocraphal books of 1 and 2 Maccabees, the first-century B.C. writer Diodorus Siculus, the Roman historian Livy (ca. 59 B.C.-A.D. 17), Josephus, the second-century A.D. writer Appian, and the historian Porphyry, whom Jerome quoted. See Goldingay, p. 293; Baldwin, p. 190.] <\/span><\/p>\n Four future Persian kings 11:2<\/span><\/p>\n This revelation begins at the same place as the vision of the ram and the goat in chapter 8. It begins with the second kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar’s image (ch. 2) and with the second of the four beasts (ch. 7), namely, Medo-Persia.<\/p>\n Daniel learned that three more Persian kings would arise after Darius (Cyrus, cf. Dan 10:1). Historically, these proved to be Cambyses, Pseudo-Smerdis (also known as Gaumata and Bardiya), and Darius I. The fourth Persian king to appear did become<\/span> stronger than his predecessors, and he attacked Greece-just as predicted. He was Xerxes I (Ahasuerus). Some conservative scholars do not count Pseudo-Smerdis, but identify the third king as Xerxes, and the fourth as Artaxerxes I (465-424, Ezr 7:11-26). However, Artaxerxes did not contend with Greece as Xerxes did. Xerxes attacked Greece in 480 B.C. with a huge army, but he suffered defeat and never recovered. This battle probably happened between chapters 1 and 2 of Esther. [Note: See the chart of Persian Kings of the Restoration Period under my comments on 5:31 above.] <\/span><\/p>\n "After his [Xerxes’] great army (estimated by Herodotus at a million men) had subdued virtually all of Greece down to the Isthmus of Corinth and the city of Athens had been reduced to ashes, Xerxes’ navy was thoroughly worsted by the united Greek fleet at the Battle of Salamis in 480 B.C. This unexpected setback prompted him to beat a hasty retreat to Asia. The one-hundred-thousand-man land army he left behind under the command of Mardonius was completely crushed in the following year by the allied forces of the Greeks at the battle of Plataea." [Note: Archer, "Daniel," p. 128.] <\/span><\/p>\n FIRST SECTION<\/p>\n {Dan 11:2-9}<\/p>\n Events from the rise of Alexander the Great (B.C. 336) to the death of Seleucus Nicator (B.C. 280). There are to be three kings of Persia after Cyrus (who is then reigning), of whom the third is to be the richest; and “when he is waxed strong through his riches, he shall stir up the all against the realm of Javan.”<\/p>\n There were of course many more than four kings of Persia: viz.-<\/p>\n Cyrus-536 <\/p>\n Cambyses-529 <\/p>\n Pseudo-Smerdis-522 <\/p>\n Darius Hystaspis-521 <\/p>\n Xerxes I-485 <\/p>\n Artaxerxes I (Longimanus)-464 <\/p>\n Xerxes II-425 <\/p>\n Sogdianus-425 <\/p>\n Darius Nothus-424 <\/p>\n Artaxerxes II (Mnemon)-405 <\/p>\n Artaxerxes III-359 <\/p>\n Darius Codomannus-336<\/p>\n But probably the writer had no historic sources to which to refer, and only four Persian kings are prominent in Scripture-Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes, and Artaxerxes. Darius Codomannus is indeed mentioned in Neh 12:22, but might have easily been overlooked, and even confounded with another Darius in uncritical and unhistorical times. The rich fourth king who “stirs up the all against the realm of Grecia” might be meant for Artaxerxes I, but more probably refers to Xerxes (Achashverosh, or Ahaseurus), and his immense and ostentatious invasion of Greece (B.C. 480). His enormous wealth is dwelt upon by Herodotus. <\/p>\n Dan 11:3 (B.C. 336-323).-Then shall rise a mighty king (Alexander the Great). and shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.<\/p>\n “Fortunam solus omnium mortalium in potestate habuit,” says his historian, Quintus Curtius.<\/p>\n Dan 11:4 (B.C. 323).-But when he is at the apparent zenith of his strength his kingdom shall be broken, and shall not descend to any of his posterity, but (B.C. 323-301) shall be for others, and shall ultimately (after the Battle of Ipsus, B.C. 301) be divided towards the four winds of heaven, into the kingdoms of Cassander (Greece and Macedonia), Ptolemy (Egypt, Coele-Syria, and Palestine), Lysimachus (Asia Minor), and Seleucus (Upper Asia).<\/p>\n Dan 11:5 -Of these four kingdoms and their kings the vision is only concerned with two-the kings of the South (i.e., the Lagidae, or Egyptian Ptolemies, who sprang from Ptolemy Lagos), and the kings of the North (i.e., the Antiochian Seleucidae). They alone are singled out because the Holy Land became a sphere of contentions between these rival dynasties. B.C. 306.-The King of the South (Ptolemy Soter, son of Lagos) shall bestrong, and shall ultimately assume the title of Ptolemy I, King of Egypt. But one of his princes or generals (Seleucus Nicator) shall be stronger and, asserting his independence, shall establish a great dominion over Northern Syria and Babylonia.<\/p>\n Dan 11:6 (B.C. 250).-The vision then passes over the reign of Antiochus II (Soter), and proceeds to say that “at the end of years” (i.e., some half-century later, B.C. 250) the kings of the North and South should form a matrimonial alliance. The daughter of the King of the South-the Egyptian Princess Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy II (Philadelphus), should come to the King of the North (Antiochus Theos) to make an agreement. This agreement (marg., “equitable conditions”) was that Aniochus Theos should divorce his wife and half-sister Laodice, and disinherit her children, and bequeath the throne to any future child of Berenice, who would thus unite the empires of the Ptolemies and the Seleucidae. Berenice took with her so vast a dowry that she was called “the dowry-bringer.” Antiochus himself accompanied her as far as Pelusium (B.C. 247). But the compact ended in nothing but calamity. For, two years after, Ptolemy II died, leaving an infant child by Berenice. But Berenice did ” not retain the strength of her arm ,” since the military force which accompanied her proved powerless for her protection; nor did Ptolemy II abide, nor any support which he could render. On the contrary, there was overwhelming disaster. Berenices escort, her father, her husband, all perished, and she herself and her infant child were murdered by her rival Laodice (B.C. 246), in the sanctuary of Daphne, whither she had fled for refuge.<\/p>\n Dan 11:7 (B.C. 285-247).-But the murder of Berenice shall be well avenged. For “out of a shoot from her roots” stood up one in his office, even her brother Ptolemy III (Euergetes), who, unlike the effeminate Ptolemy II, did not entrust his wars to his generals, but came himself to his armies. He shall completely conquer the King of the North (Seleucus II, Kallinikos, son of Antiochus Theos and Laodice), shall seize his fortress (Seleucia, the port of Antioch).<\/p>\n Dan 11:8 (B.C. 247).-In this campaign Ptolemy Euergetes, who earned the title of “Benefactor” by this vigorous invasion, shall not only win immense booty-four thousand talents of gold and many jewels, and forty thousand talents of silver-but shall also carry back with him to Egypt the two thousand five hundred molten images, and idolatrous vessels, which, two hundred and eighty years before (B.C. 527), Cambyses had carried away from Egypt. After this success he will, for some years, refrain from attacking the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\n Dan 11:9 (B.C. 240).-Seleucus Kallinikos makes an attempt to avenge the shame and loss of the invasion of Syria by invading Egypt, but he returns to his own land totally foiled and defeated, for his fleet was destroyed by a storm.<\/p>\n And now will I show thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than [they] all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Greece. 2. And now will I declare truth unto thee ] … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 11:2”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-22049","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22049","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22049"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22049\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22049"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22049"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22049"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"