Danielchapter 8
27 verses · Daniel, by tradition · 6th century BC · The Prophets
The two-horned ram that you saw represents the kings of Media and Persia.
Introduction
Daniel, by tradition, The Prophets, Daniel Overview.
This chapter returns the book to Hebrew, and the rest of Daniel stays in it. It was kept for Jews who would face the worst attack on their temple since Babylon, and it names the kingdoms that stand between them and that day. It is dated to the third year of Belshazzar, two years after the vision of the four beasts. Listen for the animals, the horns and the numbers, and for how precisely the angel names them. Listen too for how the vision leaves Daniel himself, which says a great deal about what he saw.
Context
- Who
- Exiles being told the names of the empires that had not happened yet
- What
- An apocalyptic vision of the ram and the goat, the little horn that attacks the sanctuary and Gabriel's explanation of the vision.
- Where
- In the vision, the citadel of Susa in the province of Elam, beside the Ulai Canal.
- When
- The third year of Belshazzar, about 551 BC.
- Why
- To warn God's people that the sanctuary would be defiled after the fall of Persia, and to assure them that the time of desolation was fixed by God and would end.
Historical context
The language switches back to Hebrew here after the long Aramaic stretch, and the vision narrows. Chapter 7 showed four beasts; this one shows two animals and names them outright, the ram is Media and Persia, the goat is Greece.
Show the rest of the historical context, 4 more paragraphs
The setting is a detail worth pausing on. Daniel sees himself in Susa, by the Ulai. When the vision was given, Susa belonged to Elam; within a generation it was one of the great capitals of the Persian empire, its huge pillared audience hall the place where kings received the world. Later it is where Nehemiah hears the news about Jerusalem and where Esther becomes queen.
The ram with two unequal horns fits Persia exactly: a partnership of Medes and Persians in which the Persian side rose second and grew larger. The goat that crosses the earth without touching the ground, with one great horn between his eyes, fits Alexander of Macedon, who crossed into Asia in 334 BC and had the Persian empire four years later. The horn breaks at the height of his strength and four come up in its place, Alexander died at thirty-two and his generals carved the empire into pieces.
Out of one of those pieces comes a small horn that grows, stops the daily sacrifice, and defiles the sanctuary. History records a ruler who did precisely that: Antiochus IV, king of the Seleucid share, who in 167 BC banned the Jewish sacrifices and set up a pagan altar in the Jerusalem temple.
This chapter is where the dating argument concentrates. Because the detail is so exact, one school treats the book as written after those events, in the second century BC. The book presents itself as a sixth-century BC record and MannaFest reads it that way, prophecy that came true. The dispute is real and unsettled, and something does rest on it: the seventy-weeks chronology of chapter 9 only works on the earlier date.
Significance
Whenever a reader first met this chapter, its effect was the same: the sanctuary would be defiled, and God had said so before it happened, and He also said how long, the vision ends with the sanctuary cleansed.
Show the rest of the significance, 1 more paragraph
Daniel's own reaction is worth noticing. He faints and is sick for days. This was not comfort to him. It was the news that the trouble was not over when Babylon ended, and that the God who governs it had already fixed its limit.
This chapter in Jewish lifeWhat this chapter is in Jewish life and reading.
What is done
The vision of the ram and the goat has no reading in the synagogue. Probed for this lane, the site's own table in src/lib/hebraic/readings.ts printed parashot total 0 and haftarah uses total 0 for Daniel, and no festival reading. The site's book dossier records that Daniel stands among the Writings in the Hebrew Bible rather than among the Prophets, so no weekly portion is drawn from it and no Haftarah either.
The chapter is met in the Talmud at Megillah 10b:29 under the second verse, at Gittin 56b under the twenty-fifth, and at Jerusalem Talmud Rosh Hashanah 3:8:2 under the twelfth. The chronicle Seder Olam Rabbah carries it at 30:1, under the twenty-first.
How it is read
Rashi is the one commentator on this chapter with English in the corpus, quoted from The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg, which Sefaria reports as CC-BY at fifty words or fewer.
The horns of the ram are "symbolizing the kingdom of Persia and Media" (Rashi on Daniel 8:3:1). The first king of the goat is Alexander, whom Rashi calls the one who slew Darius, the son of Esther, citing the book of Josiphon, chapter 9 (Rashi on Daniel 8:21:1). The host of heaven cast down to the earth is Israel, "who were compared to the stars" (Rashi on Daniel 8:10:1). The Prince of the host is the Temple, and of the little horn Rashi says "He blasphemed the Holy One, blessed be He" (Rashi on Daniel 8:11:1).
The two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings draw Rashi's most careful note. He reports an interpretation in the name of Saadia Gaon and says its time has already passed. He then offers his own count, reading the words for evening and morning as a number, 574, and adding it to 2,300 to reach 2,874. He closes with a warning about his own method: "when the end passes, it will be known that the expounder has erred in his interpretation, and the one who comes after him will search and expound in another manner" (Rashi on Daniel 8:14:1). He sets the end of the vision at "the wicked of Israel in the Second Temple will be finished" (Rashi on Daniel 8:23:1).
The corpus carries twenty-four commentary entries on this chapter, the cap its fetch sets, and they stop at the twenty-fourth verse, so what the commentators say on the verses after it is not reported here. The corpus carries two further notes on this chapter without an English text, each marked linked because Sefaria holds no English version of the ref. They stand cited and unquoted: Ibn Ezra on Daniel 8:4:1 and Metzudat David on Daniel 8:6:1.
What the rabbis say
The corpus carries thirty-five rabbinic locators on this chapter. Four of them stand in the Talmud and its minor tractates and the rest in the Midrash. The corpus carries the text of none, so each is cited by ref here and never quoted.
On the first verse it holds Bereshit Rabbah 85:2. On the second verse it holds Esther Rabbah 1:14, Jerusalem Talmud Taanit 1:1:17 and Megillah 10b:29. On the third verse it holds Bereshit Rabbah 16:3 and Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 407:1. On the fourth verse it holds Bereshit Rabbah 44:15, Midrash Sekhel Tov, Bereshit 15:21:12 and Midrash Tanchuma Buber, Toldot 13:1. On the fifth verse it holds Otzar Midrashim, Midrash on the Ten Kings 1:12, Otzar Midrashim, Midrash Shelosha v'Arba'ah 4:5 and Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 11:18. On the seventh verse it holds Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 701:3.
On the eighth verse it holds Midrash Aggadah, Genesis 15:11:4 and Shemot Rabbah 51:7. On the ninth verse it holds Sifrei Devarim 49:2. On the tenth verse it holds Tanna DeBei Eliyahu Rabbah 18:4. On the twelfth verse it holds Bereshit Rabbah 8:5, Eikhah Rabbah, Petichta 2 and Jerusalem Talmud Rosh Hashanah 3:8:2. On the thirteenth verse it holds Bereshit Rabbah 21:1, Bereshit Rabbati, Parashat Bereshit 70 and Midrash Tanchuma Buber, Bereshit 23:1. On the fourteenth verse it holds Midrash Lekach Tov, Exodus 12:42:4 and Midrash Sekhel Tov, Shemot 12:42:10.
On the sixteenth verse it holds Bamidbar Rabbah 19:4, Bereshit Rabbah 27:1 and Kohelet Rabbah 2:21:1. On the twentieth verse it holds Ein Yaakov (Glick Edition), Yoma 1:10, Ein Yaakov, Yoma 1:13 and Midrash Lekach Tov, Genesis 15:10:6. On the twenty-first verse it holds Seder Olam Rabbah 30:1. On the twenty-second verse it holds Midrash Lekach Tov on Lamentations 1:13:1. On the twenty-third verse it holds Shemot Rabbah 15:6. On the twenty-fifth verse it holds Gittin 56b.
Sefaria also files five links for this chapter to Learning to Read Midrash, a modern study rather than a rabbinic source. They are named among the sources and left out of the count above. What each locator teaches is a saying of the rabbis, and it is reported as theirs wherever this site quotes one. The quotations wait on a fetch that carries the text.
Sources: Rashi, Rashi on Daniel 8:1:1 to Daniel 8:24:1, The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg, reported CC-BY; Ibn Ezra, Ibn Ezra on Daniel 8:4:1, cited by ref because the corpus carries no English text; Metzudat David, Metzudat David on Daniel 8:6:1, cited by ref because the corpus carries no English text; Learning to Read Midrash, Learning to Read Midrash, Appendix; Hebrew Sources 14:3 | Learning to Read Midrash, Chapter 14; The Meaning of a Chronological Problem; Connecting Yosef and Yehuda 159 | Learning to Read Midrash, Appendix; Hebrew Sources 13:3 | Learning to Read Midrash, Chapter 13; Interpreting Dialogue II; What is God's Name? 45 | Learning to Read Midrash, Chapter 13; Interpreting Dialogue II; What is God's Name? 92, linked by Sefaria under Midrash, cited by ref; The Sefaria corpus, scripts/data/sources/sefaria/daniel/8.json, the 35 Talmud and Midrash locators of this chapter; The site's own files, src/lib/hebraic/readings.ts, probed for this book and printing daniel parashot total 0 and haftarah uses total 0, and src/components/book/dossier-content/daniel.ts on the place of Daniel among the Writings.
The heads below are this chapter's scenes. The numbered points under each are its verses.
The ram, the goat, and the great horn broken at its height
Daniel 8:1-2
the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar: The vision comes in the third year of Belshazzar. Daniel sees himself “in the citadel of Susa”, later the winter capital of the Persian kings. The older commentators note that God shows him this future seat of the empire, before Persia has taken a province from Babylon.
Daniel 8:1
“In the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar,.... Which some say (t) was the last year of his reign; but, according to Ptolemy's canon, he reigned seventeen years; and so says Josephus (u); however, this, as well as the preceding vision, were seen before what happened recorded in the "fifth" and "sixth" chapters. The following vision was seen by Daniel, according to Bishop Usher (w) and Dean Prideaux (x) in the year of the world 3451 A.M., and 553 B.C.”
the citadel of Susa: Readers differ on where Daniel was. John Gill held he was at Susa only in the vision, while Adam Clarke thought Susa was Daniel's ordinary residence. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown noted that Susa would become the capital of Persia after Cyrus, the kingdom the ram signifies.
Daniel 8:2
“I saw in a vision - Daniel was at this time in Shushan, which appears to have been a strong place, where the kings of Persia had their summer residence. It was the capital of the province of Elam or the Elymais; which province was most probably added to the Chaldean territories by Nebuchadnezzar; see Jer 49:34, Jer 49:35. Here was Daniel’s ordinary residence; and though here at this time, he, in vision, saw himself on the banks of the river Ulai. This is the same as the river Euleus, which divided Shushan or Susiana from Elymais.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
Daniel 8:3-4
a ram with two horns: The ram with two horns, “the longer one” growing up later, is read by the older commentators as Media and Persia joined. The ram charges “toward the west and the north and the south,” the compass of the conquests of Cyrus, and none could stand against him.
toward the west and the north: Albert Barnes observed that the east goes unmentioned, for the conquests of Media and Persia lay west, north and south. Adam Clarke, citing Calmet, named the chief wars: against the Scythians to the north, the Greeks to the west and the Egyptians to the south.
Daniel 8:4
“I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward,.... That is, with his horns, as rams do; these kingdoms using all their power and strength, wealth and riches, in fighting with and subduing nations, and pushing on their conquests in all parts here mentioned; to the west, Babylon, Syria, Asia, and part of Greece; to the north, Iberia, Albania, Armenia, Scythia, Colchis, and the inhabitants of the Caspian sea; and to the south, Arabia, Ethiopia, Egypt, and India; all which places were conquered by Cyrus and his successors.”
Daniel 8:5-8
a goat with a prominent horn: The goat crossing the earth “without touching the ground” pictures the speed of Alexander, and the older commentators take the prominent horn as Alexander himself. His rage against the ram pictures the fall of Persia. The horn broken “at the height of his power” is the sudden death of Alexander.
Daniel 8:5
“This was Alexander the Great, the son of Philip king of Macedonia. He came from the west, from Greece, which lay west from Persia. He fetched a great compass with his army: he came upon the face of the whole earth; he did in effect conquer the world, and then sat down and wept because there was not another world to be conquered.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
rushed at him with furious power: Albert Barnes saw in the goat's furious power the force of Alexander's attacks on Persia. Matthew Henry put the army that came against the ram at no more than thirty thousand foot and five thousand horse. Henry read the goat's rush as a surprise attack.
Daniel 8:6
“And he came to the ram - This and the following verse give an account of the overthrow of the Persian empire by Alexander. And ran unto him in the fury of his power - The conflicts between the Greeks and the Persians were excessively severe. Alexander first vanquished the generals of Darius, at the river Granicus, in Phrygia; he next attacked and totally routed Darius, at the straits of Issus, in Cilicia; and afterwards at the plains of Arbela, in Assyria.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
1 more voice on this verse
Daniel 8:6
“Alexander with his victorious army attacked the kingdom of Persia, an army consisting of no more than 30,000 foot and 5000 horse. He ran unto him, to surprise him ere he could get intelligence of his motions, in the fury of his power.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
shattered his two horns: Ishodad of Merv and Adam Clarke took the ram's two horns as Media and Persia, shattered together. Clarke tied the goat's rage to the attempts of Darius to bribe Alexander's captains to kill him, and recorded the burning of Persepolis. Albert Barnes placed the blow in the heart of Persia.
Daniel 8:7
“And I saw him, come close unto the ram - The ram standing on the banks of the Ulai, and in the very heart of the empire. This representation is designed undoubtedly to denote that the Grecian power would attack the Persian in its own dominions. Perhaps the vision was represented at the place which would be the capital of the empire in order to denote this. And he was moved with choler against him - (i. e., the ram).” With wrath or anger. That is, he acted as if he were furiously enraged. This is not an improper representation.”
his large horn was broken off: Adam Clarke noted that the large horn, Alexander, was broken off and that his brother and two sons were later murdered. The four prominent horns are named differently. Theodoret of Cyrus named Ptolemy, Seleucus, Antigonus and Antipater, while Hippolytus of Rome named Seleucus, Demetrius, Ptolemy and Philip.
Daniel 8:8
“Next after the male goat was exalted, "his great horn was shattered, and four horns arose under him to the four winds of heaven." [Daniel 8:8] For after Alexander ruled all the land of Persia and subjected them, later he died, dividing his kingdom to his four Chiefs as is shown above, that is to Seleucus, to Demetrius, to Ptolemy, and to Philip, from whom one horn was exalted and grew great unto the power of heaven.”
Hippolytus of Rome · written before 235 · Commentary on Daniel 4.26.5-6patristic
1 more voice on this verse
Daniel 8:8
“The he-goat waxed very strong - He had subdued nearly the whole of the then known world. The great horn was broken - Alexander died in the height of his conquests, when he was but about thirty-three years of age. His natural brother, Philip Aridaeus, and his two sons, Alexander Aegus and Hercules, kept up the show and name of the Macedonian kingdom for a time; but they were all murdered within fifteen years; and thus the great horn, the Macedonian kingdom, was broken, Alexander’s family being now cut off.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
The little horn and 2,300 evenings and mornings
Daniel 8:9-12
a little horn emerged: A little horn grows toward “the Beautiful Land”, the land of Israel. Keil and Barnes, with near unanimity among the older commentators, identify it as Antiochus IV. It removes “His daily sacrifice” and overthrows the sanctuary, and the older commentators read “the rebellion” as the unfaithfulness of Israel.
Daniel 8:9
“And out of one of them, came forth a little horn - Emblematic of new power that should spring up. Compare the notes at Dan 7:8. This little horn sprang, up out of one of the others; it did not spring up in the midst of the others as the little horn, in Dan 7:8, did among the ten others. This seemed to grow out of one of the four, and the meaning cannot be misunderstood.”
1 more voice on this verse
Daniel 8:9
“Hence the need of prophecy to prepare them for Antiochus. The struggle of the Maccabees was a fruit of Daniel's prophecy (1 Maccabees 2:59). He is the forerunner of the final Antichrist, standing in the same relation to the first advent of Christ that Antichrist does to His second coming.”
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)reformed
some of the host and some: Adam Clarke read the host of heaven as the Jewish hierarchy and the stars cast down to the earth as its priests and Levites. Ishodad of Merv named Onias, Eleazar and the Maccabees. Albert Barnes and Jamieson, Fausset and Brown compared the boast in Isaiah 14:13.
Daniel 8:10
“The host of heaven - The Jewish hierarchy. The stars, the priests and Levites. The powers or host of heaven are probably intended by our Lord, Mat 24:29, to signify the whole Jewish hierarchy.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
the Prince of the host: Albert Barnes reported that Grotius and Ephraem the Syrian took the Prince of the host as the high priest Onias. Lengerke took Him as God, the reading Barnes preferred. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown observed that Antiochus halted the daily sacrifice, robbed the sanctuary, and left it standing.
Daniel 8:11
“Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host - Grotius, Ephraem the Syrian, and others, understand this of Onias the high priest, as the chief officer of the holy people. Lengerke supposes that it means God himself. This interpretation is the more probable; and the idea in the phrase “prince of the host” is, that as God is the ruler of the host of heaven - leading on the constellations, and marshalling the stars, so he may be regarded as the ruler of the holy army here below - the ministers of religion, and his people.”
1 more voice on this verse
Daniel 8:11
“He not only opposes God's ancient people, but also God Himself. daily sacrifice--offered morning and evening (Ex 29:38, 39). taken away--by Antiochus (1 Maccabees 1:20-50). sanctuary . . . cast down--Though robbed of its treasures, it was not strictly "cast down" by Antiochus. So that a fuller accomplishment is future.”
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)reformed
flung truth to the ground: Albert Barnes listed renderings of the host given over to the horn: strength in the Vulgate, sin permitted in Theodotion, and might in Luther. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown placed the rebellion in the future, for Onias ruled in godliness under Antiochus. They read the truth flung down as true worship.
Daniel 8:12
“But transgression was not at the full (Da 8:23) under Antiochus; for Onias the high priest administered the laws in godliness at the time (2 Maccabees 3:1). Therefore the "transgression" must refer to that of the Jews hereafter restored to Palestine in unbelief. the truth--the worship of the true God.”
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)reformed
Daniel 8:13-14
One holy one asks another how long, and the answer is “2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be properly restored”. The tradition ties the restoring to the Maccabean rededication of the temple, later kept as Hanukkah, and the exact reckoning stays open.
Daniel 8:13
“The angels concern themselves in the affairs of the church, and enquire concerning them, if, as here, concerning its temporal salvations, much more do they desire to look into the great salvation, 1 Pet. i. One saint spoke of the thing, and another enquired concerning it. Thus John, who lay in Christ's bosom, was beckoned to by Peter to ask Christ a question, John xiii.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
John Wesley counted literal days from the rebellion of Menelaus, and Jerome sought the fulfilment under Antiochus in Maccabees and Josephus. Adam Clarke took the days as years from Alexander's invasion of Asia, and Jamieson, Fausset and Brown reported Cumming's count that ends in 1820.
Daniel 8:14
“Then - Just so long it was, from the defection of the people, procured by Menelaus, the high-priest, to the cleansing of the sanctuary, and the re-establishment of religion among them.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
Gabriel sent to explain the vision of the end
the appearance of a man: Albert Barnes saw Gabriel in human form. Adam Clarke reported the view that he was the Messiah, and Matthew Henry noted that some held him to be Christ. Jerome observed that watching a vision and trying to understand it are different things.
Daniel 8:15-19
trying to understand it: A voice says, “Gabriel, explain the vision to this man”, the first angel named in Scripture, who returns at 9:21. Gabriel calls Daniel “Son of man”, which the older commentators distinguish from the Son of Man of chapter 7 as an address to a mortal.
Daniel 8:15
“One in the appearance of a man (who, some think, was Christ himself, for who besides could command angels?) orders Gabriel to make Daniel understand this vision. Sometimes God is pleased to make use of the ministration of angels, not only to protect his children, but to instruct them, to serve the kind intentions, not only of his providence, but of his grace.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
1 more voice on this verse
Daniel 8:15
“And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision,.... The whole of the preceding vision, concerning the ram, he goat, and little horn, and what were done by them; the prophet not only affirms he saw this vision, but repeats the affirmation, expressing his own name, partly for the sake of emphasis, and partly for the greater confirmation of his words; wherefore it was a most impudent thing Porphyry to say, that the true Daniel never saw this vision; but what is here related was written after Antiochus's reign, and falsely ascribed to him.”
the voice of a man calling: The man calling from the banks of the Ulai goes unnamed. Jerome reported the Jewish view the voice was Michael's, Albert Barnes held it was God, and Ephrem the Syrian took it as Daniel's guardian angel. Barnes noted that the speaker was heard but never seen.
Matthew Henry gave two readings of Son of man: a reminder of Daniel's humanity, or an honour linking him to the Son of Man. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown saw Antiochus as the vision's immediate subject and Antichrist as its further reference. Theodoret of Cyrus placed its fulfilment many years off.
Daniel 8:17
“So he came near where I stood - He had seen him, evidently, at first in the distance. He now drew near to Daniel, that he might communicate with him the more readily. And when, he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face - Doubtless perceiving that he was a celestial being. See the notes at Rev 1:17. Compare Eze 1:28, and Dan 10:8-9. He was completely overpowered by the presence of the celestial stranger, and sank to the ground.”
2 more voices on this verse
Daniel 8:17
“The first definite person we find named in Scripture "son of man" is, speaking at the moment from memory, Daniel. And after him, Ezekiel. They were prophets in the captivity, so far as our researches go in the undisputed books that pass currently as inspired, there is no one named by this title.… It was, as we think, because the people of captivity were sinners that Daniel alone, to their reproach, because they preserved the dignity of human nature, made according to the image and the likeness, was addressed as the son of man.”
Origen of Alexandria · written before 253 · Selections in Psalmspatristic
Daniel 8:17
“Or thus he preaches humility to him; though he be admitted to converse with angels, he must not be puffed up with it, but must remember that he is a son of man. Or perhaps this title puts honour upon him: the Messiah was lately called the Son of man ( ch. vii. 13 ), and Daniel is akin to him, and is a figure of him as a prophet and one greatly beloved.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
I fell into a deep sleep: Matthew Henry traced Daniel's deep sleep to faintness under the weight of the vision, like the disciples who slept for sorrow in the garden. Albert Barnes compared Daniel 10:9. Jerome held that Gabriel touched him and helped him up so he could listen calmly and understand.
Daniel 8:18
“Now, as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground - Overcome and prostrate with the vision. That is, he had sunk down stupified or senseless. See Dan 10:9. His strength had been entirely taken away by the vision. There is nothing improbable in this, that the sudden appearance of a celestial vision, or a heavenly being, should take away the strength.”
the latter time of wrath: Albert Barnes took the wrath as God's displeasure with His people for their sins, shown in the terrible destruction Antiochus would cause. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown stressed that the wrath is limited to an appointed time. Matthew Henry drew comfort from the appointed end.
Daniel 8:19
“And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation - In the future time when the Divine indignation shall be manifest toward the Hebrew people; to wit, by suffering the evils to come upon them which Antiochus would inflict. It is everywhere represented that these calamities would occur as a proof of the Divine displeasure on account of their sins. Compare Dan 9:24; Dan 11:35; 2 Macc. 7:33. For at the time appointed the end shall be - It shall not always continue.”
1 more voice on this verse
Daniel 8:19
“Let it be laid up for a comfort to those who shall live to see these calamitous times that there shall be an end of them; the indignation shall cease ( Isa. x. 25 ); it shall be overpast, Isa. xxvi. It may intermit and return again, but the last end shall be glorious; good will follow it, nay, and good will be brought out of it.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
Media, Persia, Greece, and the king of fierce countenance
Daniel 8:20-22
the kings of Media and Persia: The ram is “the kings of Media and Persia”, the shaggy goat “the king of Greece”, and the large horn “the first king”. The older commentators read that king unanimously as Alexander, and the four kingdoms that rise from his nation “will not have the same power”.
is the first king: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown explained why Alexander is called the first king, though Philip reigned in Macedon before him. Alexander first led Greece in subduing Persia. Albert Barnes held that shaggy goat and male goat were used interchangeably for the same animal.
Daniel 8:21
“And the rough goat - See the notes at Dan 8:5. In Dan 8:5 he is called a he-goat. Here the word rough or hairy - שׂעיר s'â‛ı̂yr - is applied to it. This appellation is often given to a goat Lev 4:24; Lev 16:9; Gen 37:31. It would seem that either term - a he-goat, or a hairy-goat - would serve to designate the animal, and it is probable that the terms were used indiscriminately. Is the king of Grecia - Represents the king of Greece.”
will not have the same power: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, following Maurer, read the four kingdoms as lacking Alexander's power, for one nation broken into four is weaker than one. Adam Clarke added that no king of the four would rise from Alexander's family. Albert Barnes noted that the four need not rise at once.
Daniel 8:22
“Now that being broken,.... That is, the great horn Alexander, the first king of the Grecian monarchy; whose death, either by drunkenness, or by poison, is here expressed by being "broken".”
Daniel 8:23-25
an insolent king, skilled in intrigue: Keil and Barnes read this king as Antiochus, the little horn of verse 9: his power great “but it will not be his own”. He will “stand against the Prince of princes”, God for the older writers, and “will be broken off, but not by human hands”.
Daniel 8:23
“And in the latter time of their kingdom - When it shall be drawing to an end. All these powers were ultimately absorbed in the Roman power; and the meaning here is, that taking the time from the period of their formation - the division of the empire after the battle of Ipsus (see the notes at Dan 8:8), until the time when all would be swallowed up in the Roman dominion, what is here stated - to wit, the rise of Antiochus - would be in the latter portion of that period.”
it will not be his own: John Wesley traced the great power to factions among the Jews and to the help of other kings. Albert Barnes saw the power given every king. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown saw the power of Satan, and Adam Clarke saw Rome destroying “the mighty men along with the holy people.”
Daniel 8:24
“But not by his own power - The strength of the other kingdoms consisted in themselves; but the Roman empire, as a horn or kingdom of the goat, was not mighty by its own power - was not strong by virtue of the goat, but drew its nourishment and strength from Rome and Italy. There grew the trunk and body of the tree; though the branches extended over Greece, Asia, Syria, and Egypt. - Bp. Newton. Shall destroy wonderfully - In the taking of Jerusalem by the Romans ninety-seven thousand Jews were made captives, and eleven hundred thousand were slain.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
2 more voices on this verse
Daniel 8:24
“Not by his own power - Not by any heroick deeds, but by making use of the Jewish factions, through the divine commission to punish a backsliding nation; and by means of Eumenes and Attalus, by whose help he got up to this height.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
Daniel 8:24
“He shall act by the power of Satan, who shall then be permitted to work through him in unrestricted license, such as he has not now (Re 13:2); hence the ten kingdoms shall give the beast their power (2Th 2:9-12; Re 17:13). prosper and practise--prosper in all that he attempts (Da 8:12). holy people--His persecutions are especially directed against the Jews.”
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)reformed
but not by human hands: John Wesley took a time of peace to mean under a show of kindness, and named the image of Jupiter in the sanctuary. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown read the king broken off, but not by human hands, as God's own stroke. They compared the stone cut out in Daniel 2:34.
Daniel 8:25
"A spoiler at noon-day." also . . . against the Prince of princes--not merely against the Jews (Da 8:11; 11:36). broken without hand--by God's special visitation. The stone "cut out of the mountain without hands," that is, Christ is to smite the world power image on his feet (Da 2:34), that is, in its last development (compare Da 7:11).
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)reformed
Daniel 8:26-27
you must seal up the vision: The vision “of the evenings and the mornings” is true, and Daniel must “seal up the vision, for it concerns the distant future”. Daniel answers in body as well as mind: he is “exhausted and lay ill for days”, then returns to “the king’s business”.
Daniel 8:26
“He shall cause craft to prosper - They subdued as many by their diplomatic skill and political intrigues as they did by the sword. He shall also stand up against the Prince of princes - Against Christ, for it was by the Roman authority that he was condemned to death and crucified; and their persecutions had nearly destroyed the Christian religion; but the house was founded on a rock. But he shall be broken without hand - The tide was turned by the invisible hand of God; and thus heathen Rome was overcome, and converted to Christianity.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
I was confounded by the vision: John Wesley and Theodoret of Cyrus observed Daniel kept the vision to himself while he went about the king's business. Matthew Henry thought silence made the burden heavier. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown drew the lesson that nearest communion with heaven best fits a man for the duties of common life.
Daniel 8:27
“And I Daniel fainted - Hebrew, “I was “ - נהייתי nı̂heyēythı̂y. Compare Dan 2:1. The meaning, according to Gesenius (“Lexicon”), is, “I was done up, and was sick:” - I was done over, etc. Perhaps the “reason” of his using this verb here is, that he represents himself as “having been sick,” and then as fainting away, as if his life had departed. The Latin Vulgate renders it langui. Theodotion, ἐκοιμήθην ekoimēthēn - “ was laid in my bed.” The general idea is plain, that he was overcome and prostrate at the effect of the vision.”
Keep studying
Studies10
People and groups1
Sources for this chapter
The summary
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory; John Calvin, Commentaries; John Wesley, Notes on the Old Testament and Matthew Henry, Complete Commentary.
The exposition
Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Bible; Albert Barnes; Carl Friedrich Keil, Biblical Commentary on the Book of Daniel; Ephrem the Syrian, COMMENTARY ON DANIEL 8:15; Hippolytus of Rome, Commentary on Daniel 4.26.5-6; Ishodad of Merv; Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible; Jerome, St. Jerome, Commentary on Daniel, CHAPTER EIGHT; John Calvin, Commentary on the Prophet Daniel; John Gill; John Wesley, Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament; Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible and Theodoret of Cyrus.