Chapter Eight

1–14. Vision of two animals—a goat and a ram. 15–27. The interpretation by a heavenly being.

Daniel 8:1. In the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar, a vision appeared to me, Daniel, after the one that had appeared to me at the first. The subject of the vision of this chapter is the history of the succession of Medo-Persian rule by Greek-Macedonian rule Dan 8:3-7 and the characterization of the latter’s relation to the chosen people Dan 8:8-14. In both respects it supplements the vision of the preceding chapter.

Daniel 8:2. And I saw in the vision; and when I saw, I was in Susa, the capital city in the province of Elam; and I saw in the vision, and I was by the river Ulai. The vision was received by the prophet in Susa on the bank of the river Ulai. According to the opinion of some exegetes (Bertholdt, Kuenen, Cornely, Knabenbauer), Daniel was indeed in Susa, whither he had withdrawn during the reign of Nabonidus and Belshazzar; according to the words of others (Smirnov, Pesotsky), he only imagined that he was in Susa. He was here spiritually (cf. Ezek 8:3; Ezek 40:2), but not physically. However, the prophet’s presence of mind can be admitted only upon the Ulai, as this is testified to by the expression of the present verse: “and I saw in the vision, as though I were by the river Ulai.” In contrast to this, concerning Susa he says: “and when I saw, I was in Susa.” The country or province of Elam, of which Susa was the principal city, received its name from one of the sons of Shem Gen 10:22. Mentioned repeatedly afterwards in the Bible Gen 14:1; Isa 21:2; Isa 22:6-7; Ezek 32 and so on, and known in cuneiform inscriptions by various names: Numaki in ancient Akkadian, Kissi and Ilammu in Assyrian, Uyaga in Persian (“mountainous land”), it was situated to the northeast of the mouths of the Tigris and Euphrates along the southwestern slope of the Zagros mountain range. Representing a powerful state in antiquity, Elam was devastated for the first time by the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal and subsequently, among other regions, was conquered by Nebuchadnezzar Jer 25:25; Jer 49:34; Ezek 32:24 and became part of the Babylonian empire. Its principal city of Susa was founded, according to Strabo, by Typhon, father of Memnon, a contemporary of the siege of Troy, and is mentioned in one of the inscriptions of Ashurbanipal. “I,” he says, “returned to the Babylonian city of Uruk the image of the goddess Nana, carried off from there as military plunder to Susa by the Elamite king Kubur-Naihundi 1,635 years before this.” In the time of Cyrus, Susa was the spring residence of the Persian kings, and under Darius Hystaspis it was made the capital. It was situated on the river Ulai, known to the Greeks and Romans as the Eulaios (the modern Karun east of Susa).

Daniel 8:3. I looked up and saw a ram standing beside the river. It had two horns, and both horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher one came up last. According to the interpretation by the angel Gabriel, the ram with two horns signifies “the kings of Media and Persia” Dan 8:20, that is, the Medo-Persian kingdom, personified in its kings (cf. Dan 2:38)—the great horn between the eyes of the goat is the first Greek king, while the four other horns on the same animal are “four kingdoms arising from that nation.” The animal is the image of the whole people. Composed of two peoples but in fact inseparable, the Medo-Persian kingdom began its history as actually the Median kingdom: under Cyaxares the Persians were in subjection to the Medes. But under Cyrus the Persian, the relations between the peoples changed: power passed to the Persians Esth 1:3, who created the world monarchy. This historical succession in the predominance of the stronger Persians over the Medes is denoted in the vision by the detail that “the higher [horn] came up last.” As for the representation of the Medo-Persian kingdom under the image of a ram, this, corresponding to Persian symbolism (see the commentary on Dan 7:2-3) and also in Ammianus Marcellinus, according to whose words the Persian king, standing at the head of the army as its leader, wore instead of a diadem the head of a ram, characterizes the Medo-Persian monarchy from the standpoint of its solid material prosperity, stability, combined with lack of mobility and inflexibility.

Daniel 8:4. I saw the ram charging westward and northward and southward. No other beast could stand before it, and none could rescue from its power. It did what it pleased and magnified itself. With the appearance of the “higher horn,” the ram began to display its strength: it charged (an image of dominance Ezek 34:21), and no other beasts could stand before it. And indeed, with the enthronement of Cyrus came a whole series of campaigns undertaken for the purpose of conquest by the Persian kings to the west (the cities of Asia Minor, Syria, Babylon), north (the peoples of Pontus and Scythia), and south (Egypt).

Daniel 8:5. As I was watching, a male goat appeared from the west, coming across the face of the whole earth without touching the ground; the goat had a horn between his eyes. Daniel 8:6. He came to the ram that had the two horns, which I had seen standing beside the river, and he ran at him in his powerful rage. Daniel 8:7. I saw him come close to the ram, and he was enraged against him and struck the ram breaking both his horns. And the ram had no power to stand before him, but cast him down to the ground and trampled upon him, and there was no one who could rescue the ram from his power. The west, north, and south experienced the all-crushing power of the Medo-Persian kingdom. Only the east remained untouched; as is known, the campaign of Xerxes against Greece ended unsuccessfully, but from the same quarter (Persia lies to the west with respect to Greece—the goat comes from the west) came destruction in the person of the first Greek king Dan 8:21. The incredibly swift campaign of Alexander the Great into Asia (the goat moves with extraordinary swiftness, “without touching the ground”), his victories over Darius Codomannus at the Granicus, at Issus, and finally near Susa and the river Eulaios—between Gaugamela and Arbela—put an end to the existence of the Medo-Persian monarchy.

Daniel 8:8. The goat became very great; but when he was strong, the great horn was broken, and in place of it came up four horns toward the four winds of heaven. 1 Maccabees 1:5–6. Having reached the highest degree of glory as a result of the campaigns undertaken after the conquest of the Medo-Persian kingdom in Bactria, Sogdiana, and India to the Hyphasis, the Greek-Macedonian monarchy lost its famous leader Alexander the Great: “the great horn was broken,” and with this it lost a considerable part of its power and strength. By his testament (1 Mac. 1:5–6), it was divided into four new kingdoms (four horns—four kingdoms Dan 8:22), smaller of course both in size and in strength Dan 8:22: the Macedonian (Macedonia and Greece), the Syrian (Syria, Babylon, and Persia), the Thracian (Thrace, Bithynia, and the Asian possessions along the Hellespont and Bosporus), and the Egyptian (Egypt, Libya, Arabia, and Palestine). Daniel 8:9. Out of one of them came a little horn, which grew exceedingly toward the south, toward the east, and toward the beautiful land. According to the explanation by the heavenly being Dan 8:23, the new horn that appeared on the head of the goat signifies a shameless and cunning king, who is to arise at the end of the period of political existence of the four kingdoms, “when the transgressors have reached their fullness.” On the basis of 1 Macc 1:7-15, under this king one must understand Antiochus Epiphanes. “Alexander,” says the author of the first Book of Maccabees, “reigned for twelve years, and when he died, his servants took over his kingdom, each in his own place. After his death, all of them put on crowns, and his sons after them for many years; and they increased the evil in the land. And there sprung up a sinful root—Antiochus Epiphanes.... In those days lawless men came forth from Israel, and persuaded many, saying, ‘Let us go and make a covenant with the Gentiles round about us, for since we separated from them many evils have come upon us.’ This proposal pleased them well. Some of the people eagerly went to the king and he gave them leave to observe the ordinances of the Gentiles.... And they set up a gymnasium in Jerusalem, according to Gentile custom, and removed the marks of circumcision, and abandoned the holy covenant.” If according to the words of the book of the prophet Daniel, the shameless and cunning king shall arise when “the transgressors have reached their fullness,” then according to the testimony of the first Book of Maccabees, the rise of Antiochus Epiphanes coincides with the appearance among Israel of “those who had broken the holy covenant.” The introduction of uncircumcision is the highest measure of lawlessness. The identity of the time and persons admits no doubt. The little horn at first grew exceedingly toward the south, toward the east, and toward the beautiful land. Exactly so Antiochus Epiphanes, initially king of Syria, waged successful wars against the south—Egypt 1 Macc 1:16-18, the east—Persia 1 Macc 3:31; 1 Macc 6:1-4, Babylon 1 Macc 6:4, and Armenia, subduing the Armenian king Artaxias. His power also subjected the beautiful land, that is, Palestine Jer 3:19; Ezek 20:6, so called for its fertility.

Daniel 8:10. and it grew up to the host of heaven; and some of the host and of the stars it cast down to the ground, and trampled upon them. According to the interpretation by the Angel, under the “host of heaven” trampled by Antiochus Epiphanes is understood the “people of the saints” Dan 8:24, that is, the Old Testament Israel, given such a name by virtue of its calling to be a people of saints. The name “hosts” ascribed to it in the Bible Exod 12:41 is supplemented in the present case by the epithet “heavenly” in view of the fact that Israel performed a heavenly mission on earth, had as its king the Lord of heaven. According to the testimony of the first Book of Maccabees, the trampling by Antiochus Epiphanes of the “heavenly host” was expressed in the slaughter of many sons of Israel 1 Macc 1:24.

Daniel 8:11. and it grew up even to the prince of the host; and by it the continual burnt offering was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Not content with the destruction of the Jews, Antiochus Epiphanes rose up against the Prince of the heavenly host, which he manifested in taking away the continual burnt offering from him and in desecrating the place of his sanctuary. Expressing a desire that all his subjects be one people and leave their former law (religion), he, as stated in the first Book of Maccabees, made such a demand also of the Jews: he forbade them to offer burnt offerings and sacrifices, to make libations to God, and to observe the Sabbaths 1 Macc 1:45, and on the places of the destroyed altars he built shrines and altars to idols, forcing the Israelites to offer sacrifices on them to pagan gods 1 Macc 1:47-49. And the command of Antiochus was carried out: on the fifteenth day of Chislev he set up the abomination of desolation on the altar, and in the cities of Judah they built pagan altars 1 Macc 1:54; cf. 2 Macc 6 and onwards.

Daniel 8:12. And the host was given over together with the continual burnt offering because of transgression; and he cast truth down to the ground and acted and prospered. Daniel 8:24. The reason for such success lay not in the strength of Antiochus (Dan. 8:24), but in the “transgression of the host.” Palestine was handed over into his hands by those who rebelled against the holy covenant; they “joined themselves to the Gentiles and sold themselves to do evil” 1 Macc 1:15; cf. Dan 8:11-13. Daniel 8:13. And I heard a holy one speaking; and another holy one said to the one that spoke, “For how long is the vision concerning the continual burnt offering, the transgression that makes desolate, and the trampling underfoot of both the sanctuary and the host? Daniel 8:14. And he said to me, “For two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed. The duration of the giving over to Antiochus for trampling both the sanctuary and the people, according to the Angel’s words, equals 2,300 evenings and mornings. And since, according to biblical usage, the expression “evening and morning” denotes a particular, separate day Gen 1:5 and so on, in the present case “2,300 evenings and mornings” should be understood in the sense of 2,300 complete days—full days. The final point of this period is the time of cleansing of the sanctuary—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed,” that is, the restoration of true worship in the temple on the twenty-fifth day of the month Chislev in 148 B.C. 1 Macc 4:52-53. As for the initial point, it does not admit of precise determination. The open conflict of Antiochus Epiphanes with the Old Testament church began in 143 B.C., when after his defeat in Egypt he moved on Jerusalem, entered the sanctuary, and plundered it 1 Macc 1:20-23; but his godless activity in general manifested itself somewhat earlier. In particular, in 142 B.C., with his consent, the high priest Onias was deprived of his position by the efforts of the impious Jason. In turn, this latter was removed by a certain Menelaus, who stole and sold the vessels of the temple 2 Macc 4:32. In view of this, the entire period of the godless activity of Antiochus Epiphanes is determined as the time from 148 to 142 B.C., during which span there are contained 2,300 days, which equal 6 years and 3 or 4 months with several days. Besides the understanding and calculation of the “2,300 evenings and mornings” noted above, there is another. The prophetic revelation has, it is said, the matter of sacrifices as its chief subject. And since they were offered according to the law of Moses morning and evening, the expression evening—morning points to the fact that the prophet Daniel has in view the morning and evening sacrifices—the temporal points of their performance. Accordingly, evening and morning should be reckoned separately, and the number 2,300 evenings-mornings should be determined as 1,150 days, or complete days. But such a calculation is first of all contrary to biblical usage. In those cases when a Hebrew wishes to indicate separately the components of a day—day and night—he keeps a separate count of each part; he says: forty days and forty nights Gen 7:4; 1 Sam 19:8, three days and three nights John 2:1; Matt 12:40. Second, taking into account the chronological dates of Antiochus Epiphanes’ activity according to the Books of Maccabees, in it one cannot find such a period of time to which it would be possible to attach 1,150 days. Thus the initial point of the desecration of the sanctuary is considered to be either the 15th day of Chislev—the time of the setting up of the idol altar in the temple 1 Macc 1:54, or the time of the arrival in Judah of the tax collector Apollonius and the capture of Jerusalem in the same 145 B.C. (Black 1 Macc 1:29 and so on 2 Macc 5:24). But in the first case until the end of Antiochus Epiphanes’ godless activity—the 25th day of the month Chislev in 148 B.C. 1 Macc 4:52—there passed only 3 years and 10 days, or 1,090–1,105, and not 1,150 days. In the second case without any basis, but only in order to obtain the needed number, one refers the time of Apollonius’ arrival to the first month of 145 B.C.

Daniel 8:15. And when I, Daniel, had seen the vision, I sought to understand it; and behold, there stood before me one having the appearance of a man. Daniel 8:16. And I heard a human voice between the banks of the Ulai, and it called, “Gabriel, make this man understand the vision! Daniel 8:17. So he came near where I stood. When he came, I was frightened and fell upon my face. But he said to me, “Understand, O son of man, that the vision is for the time of the end! Daniel 8:18. And as he was speaking with me, I fell into a deep sleep with my face to the ground; but he touched me and set me on my feet, Daniel 8:19. The sudden and swift appearance of a being like a man testified to his non-earthly existence and heavenly nature. The name of the one who appeared convinced the prophet of the same thing—Gabriel, “the man of God.” According to Gabriel’s words, the vision pertains “to the time of the end” (cf. Dan. 8:19). But as shown in Dan 8:20-23), under the “end of the time” is understood the time of the ending of the Old Testament period, upon which falls the activity of the “shameless king” Antiochus Epiphanes. And only considering the vision of chapters 10–12, where the Old Testament enemy of the saints emerging from the third monarchy is clearly presented as a forerunner of the last enemy of the Church—the antichrist—must one conclude that in the vision of chapter 8 there is dimly contemplated the difficult position of the Church at the end of the world. Daniel 8:26. “The vision of the evenings and the mornings that has been told is true; but seal up the vision, for it pertains to many days hence. The vision about the evening and the morning should be “sealed up,” that is, should be kept and preserved in its entirety and integrity.