Grace Theological Joumal12.2 (1991) 245-261.

[Copyright © 1991 Grace Theological Seminary; cited with permission;

digitally prepared for use at Gordon and Grace Colleges and elsewhere]

 

 

THE KEY ROLE OF DANIEL 7

 

 

RICHARD D. PATTERSON

 

PERHAPS the most persistent problem with regard to the unity and

composition of the book of Daniel has been the relation of its first

six chapters to its latter half.1 Although several divergent views have

been held (particularly as to the age and provenance of chapters 1 and

72, these may presently be reduced to a widely held consensus: "The

first six chapters of the book contain material which is older than the

later chapters, and this material has been re-edited in Maccabean times

to attain a redactional unity with the apocalyptic visions of chs. 7-12.”3

This study will suggest that chapter 7 functions not only as a hinge

chapter that provides unity to the two primary literary genres in Daniel,

but plays a key role in the understanding of biblical eschatology.4

 

1 For a sample of diverse opinions, see O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament An Intro-

duction (New York: Harper and Row, 1965) 512-19.

2 Some have argued for these chapters as distinctive compositions, chapter 1 being

composed as an introduction to the court tales of 2-6, and chapter 7 being viewed as an

independent forerunner to the apocalypses of 8-12. For details, see R. K. Harrison, In-

troduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969) 1106-10; J. A. Mont-

gomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC; Edinburgh:

T. & T. Clark, 1927) 88-99; W. L. Humphreys, "A Life Style for Diaspora: A Study of

the Tales of Esther and Daniel," JBL 92 (1973): 211-23.

3 J. J. Collins, "The Court-tales in Daniel and the Development of Apocalyptic,"

JBL 94 (1975): 218; see also P. R. Davies, "Eschatology in the Book of Daniel," JSOT

17 (1980): 33-53. Scholars continue to debate whether one author (see, e.g., H. H. Row-

ley, in The Servant of the Lord and Other Essays on the Old Testament [Rev. ed.; Ox-

ford: Blackwell, 1965J 249-80) or multiple authorship (see, e.g., H. L. Ginsberg, "The

Composition of the Book of Daniel," VT 4 [1954J: 246-75; M. L. Delcor, Le Livre de

Daniel [SB; Paris: Gabalda, 1971] 10-13) can best account for the final form of the

book. A compromise position has recently been put forward by A. A. Di LelIa (in L. P.

Hartman and A. A. Di LelIa, The Book of Daniel [AB; Garden City: Doubleday, 1978]

16) who suggests that an editor-compiler (= the writer of the core apocalypse of chapter

9), utilizing the work of "several like-minded authors" was responsible for the book's

final collection. Although the original edition was written in Aramaic, a translator may

be assumed to have rendered 1:1-2:4a; 8-12 into Hebrew and subsequently published

the "work in its present form as a single book. The date would be ca. 140 B. C."

4 For discussion of hinging in the Scriptures, see R. D. Patterson, "Of Bookends,

Hinges, and Hooks: Literary Clues to the Arrangement of Jeremiah's Prophecies," WTJ

51 (1989): 116-17. For Daniel 7 as a hinge chapter, see J. E. Goldingay, Daniel (WBC;

 



246                 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DANIEL 7 TO THE STRUCTURE OF DANIEL

 

The narrative of Daniel 7, though full of complex details, is simply

told. At the onset of the reign of Belshazzar, Nabonidus' son,5 Daniel

has a dream consisting of a series of nocturnal visions.6 Daniel sees a

great sea being driven and tossed by the four winds of heaven.7 As he

looks, four great beasts come up out of the sea, the fourth of which is a

frightful appearing animal with iron teeth. It also has ten horns among

which ultimately another little horn arises, breaking off three of the

existing horns. This little horn on the fearsome and dreadful beast has

eyes and a mouth like a man and speaks great boastful words. As he

looks further, Daniel catches a glimpse of the Ancient of Days seated on

his throne before the assembled courts of heaven. The record books of

judgment are opened and the awful beast with the boastful little horn is

destroyed. Then Daniel sees "One like a Son of Man coming with the

clouds of heaven" (v. 13--NIV), to whom the Ancient of Days grants an

everlasting kingdom and authority, and before whom all men worship.

As the account continues, Daniel, who in the previous court narra-

tives serves as the divine interpreter to the Babylonian court (see 2:25-

45; 4:19-27; 5:18-28), is himself overcome by the details of the awe-

some vision and asks one of the attending angels as to the true meaning

of what he has seen. He learns that the four beasts represent a succession

of earthly kingdoms that ultimately will be succeeded by that inaugu-

rated by the Most High. Upon further inquiry concerning the fourth

beast and the little horn that spoke so boastfully, he learns that these rep-

resent the culmination of earthly powers as concentrated in the hands of

an evil ruler. This one will gain power through violent means and per-

secute the saints, enacting oppressive measures aimed at subverting all

 

Dallas: Word, 1989) 159. J. F. Walvoord (Daniel [Chicago: Moody, 1971] 151) rightly

remarks: "Chapter 7 is a high point in revelation in the book of Daniel; and, in some

sense, the material before as well as the material which follows pivots upon the detailed

revelation of this chapter."

5 The existence and importance of Belshazzar, once universally denounced by crit-

ics as unhistorical, can no longer be doubted. For details, see J. P. Free, Archaeology and

Bible History (Rev. ed.; Wheaton: Scripture Press, 1962) 233-35; G. Archer, A Survey of

Old Testament Introduction (Rev. ed.; Chicago: Moody, 1974) 382-83. E. Yamauchi

("The Archaeological Background of Daniel," BS 137 [1980]: 6) remarks: "A recent re-

examination of all the relevant cuneiform data has helped clarify the chronology. . . the

coregency of Nabonidus and Belshazzar should be dated as early as 550 and not just be-

fore the fall of Babylon in 539."

6 E. J. Young (The Prophecy of Daniel [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977] 141) terms

it "a divinely imposed dream."

7 The term "great sea" is normally assigned to the Mediterranean Sea in the Scrip-

tures: see Goldingay, Daniel, 160; L. Wood, A Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 1973) 180.

 



THE KEY ROLE OF DANIEL 7                              247

 

forms of traditional law and order. His time of rule, however, will be

terminated at the sovereign direction of God who will then institute his

rule in the midst of "the people of the Most High" (v. 27--NIV).

The account lays great stress on the dream itself with its fourfold

periodization of "beastly" nations and on the culmination of that suc-

cession in the activities of a powerful and sinister figure whose defeat

brings the process to its consummation in the blessed rule of God

amidst his followers. The structure of the narrative may be conve-

niently outlined as follows: introductory setting (1), vision (2-14),

response (15), interpretation (16-27), response (28).8

Chapter 7 has rightly been closely linked with the following mate-

rial in chapters 8-12 for at least two reasons. (1) Like those chapters,

chapter 7, while a dream, is also visionary in character, thus adding to

a group of texts comprising a unit of "vision reports.”9 Such prophetic

pieces often partake of the more frequent "announcements of judg-

ment”10 and "kingdom oracles" dealing with universal judgment and

promises of ultimate blessing.11 Their distinctive feature, however, is

that they are cast in the form of a vision. Such oracles frequently

embellish the customary Old Testament eschatological perspective of

God's superintending culmination of earth's history with an emphasis

on cosmic scope and supernatural beings who play an important part,

and on the presence of a heavenly mediator/interpreter who furnishes

needed information or interpretation.12 (2) Much of the material that is

sketched in preliminary form in chapter 7 is filled out in the succeeding

 

8 E. M. Good ("Apocalyptic as Comedy: The Book of Daniel," Semeia 32 [1984]:

57) suggests a chiastic structure to the main material in the vision: A-four beasts (v. 3),

B-first three beasts (vv. 4-6), C-fourth beast described (vv. 7-8), D-Ancient of

Days + court scene (vv. 9-10), C'-fourth beast killed (v. 11)-, B'-first three beasts pro-

longed (v. 12), A'-human figure comes with clouds (vv. 13-14).

9 On the nature of Old Testament prophecy, see my remarks in A Literary Guide to

the Bible, eds. Leland Ryken and Tremper Longman III (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,

forthcoming) .

10 See the various discussions in C. Westermann, Basic Forms of Prophetic Speech,

translated by H. C. White (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1991) 129-98.

11 See G. Vos, Biblical Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948) 307-18.

C. Westermann terms such prophecies "salvation oracles"; see, e.g., Prophetic Oracles

of Salvation in the Old Testament, translated by Keith Crim (Louisville: Westminster/

John Knox, 1991).                                            

12 The decision as to whether Daniel 7-12 can also be called apocalyptic is not an

easy one. Thus, E. Heaton (Daniel [TBC; London: SCM, 1967] 34-35) points to the

omission of such typical apocalyptic elements as cosmic imagery, great battle scenes, lu-

rid descriptions of the fate of the wicked Gentiles, and highly colored pictures of a final

kingdom, a golden age of peace, righteousness, and prosperity centered around a strong

Messianic leader. Noting the almost total absence of such typical apocalyptic themes,

teachings found in such apocalyptic pieces as I Enoch, the Sibylline Oracles, the As-

sumption of Moses, and 2 Esdras, Heaton remarks; "What we find in the present work

 



248                 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

chapters, thus making it an integral part of the latter half of Daniel.

These data are conveniently displayed in Table 1.

Chapter 7 has also been linked closely by some with the court nar-

ratives13 of chapters 1-6.14 That such a procedure is justified may be

[Daniel] . . . is not a formal apocalyptic tradition but, rather, a miscellaneous body of

prophetic teaching and imagery about the coming kingdom of God."

Likewise, Davies ("Eschatology," 34) feels that "the word 'apocalyptic' has been

detrimental to the Book of Daniel," not only because the genre itself is ill-defined but be-

cause Daniel reflects the eschatological perspective of the court tales of chapters 1-6 as

applied to the Maccabean crisis.

On the other hand, scholars such as A. B. Mickelsen (Daniel and Revelation: Rid-

dles or Realities? [Nashville: Nelson, 1984] 24-25) and J. J. Collins (The Apocalyptic

Imagination [New York: Crossroad, 1984] 68-92) defend assigning the term "apocalyp-

tic" to large portions of Daniel. Citing the importance of angelic activity and heavenly

mediatorship of revelation in Daniel, as well as the explicit hope of resurrection in chap-

ter 12, Collins ("Apocalyptic Genre and Mythic Allusions in Daniel," JSOT 21 [1981]

89) suggests that Daniel "has been hindered more fundamentally by the failure of schol-

arship to examine individual works like Daniel in the context of the genre constituted by

the corpus of apocalypses."

Both schools of interpretation can make their point. Certainly current definitions and

descriptions of apocalypse do allow distinctive portions of Daniel 7-12 to be viewed as

apocalyptic. If, however, one searches for the over-emphasis on cosmic themes, cataclys-

mic changes in the physical world and the extreme language so characteristic of later

Jewish apocalyptic fervor, it is evident that Daniel uses such things sparingly. In any

case, Daniel is more closely tied to mainstream eschatology with its emphasis on a sov-

ereign God's active superintendence of the details of history so as to bring them to his

final purposes. Daniel may, then, perhaps be better set beside such Old Testament pas-

sages as Zeph. 1:14-18 as "emergent apocalyptic." See further my discussion in Nahum,

Habakkuk, Zephaniah (WEC; Chicago: Moody, 1991) 285-88.

13 Chapters 1-6 are customarily termed "court tales." Such stories have as their cen-

tral plot an account of the heroic exploits of a godly exile in a foreign court. This person's

godly walk and wisdom prove his worth in various tests. He then rises to such personal

prominence that he is able to improve the well-being of his people or even effect their

deliverance.

These narratives customarily include such elements as: (1) a specific test involving

faith, morality, or compromise of covenantal standards, (2) the friendliness of some resident

court official, (3) besting the foreigners in contests or conflict, and (4) an unexpected ex-

traordinary resolution to a besetting problem. Typical biblical examples include Daniel

(Dan 1-6), Joseph (Gen 37-50), Esther, and, to some extent, Ezra and Nehemiah. Extra-

biblical examples may be cited in the apocryphal stories concerning Zerubbabel (I Esdras

3-4), Tobit, and Judith, as well as the Aramaic story of Ahiqar and the Egyptian Tale of

Sinuhe.

For details, see Collins, "Court-Tales," 218-34; J. G. Gammie, "On the Intention and

Sources of Daniel I-VI," VT 31 (1981): 282-92; Heaton, Daniel, 33-53; and Humphreys,

"Life Style," 211-23. Humphreys divides such stories into two types: the court contest, in

which the hero provides the interpretation to a seemingly insoluble problem and the court

conflict, in which the hero's purity is rewarded with deliverance. Humphreys' twofold cat-

egorization is perhaps the simplest way to view the court narratives. According to this ar-

rangement, Daniel 2, 4-5 belong with the first type and Daniel 3, 6, with the second.

14 See, for example, A. Lenglet, "La structure litteraire de Daniel 2-7," Biblica 53

(1972): 169-90; J. Baldwin, Daniel (TOTC; Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1978) 59-63.

 



THE KEY ROLE OF DANIEL 7                  249

 

 



250                 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

 

seen not only in the fact that chapter 7 shares the same language (Ara-

maic) with 2:4b-6:28, but that, as Lenglet observes, Daniel 2-7

"est. . . ecrit d'une maniere concentrique.”15 Indeed, its structure is

finely balanced, forming a neat chiastic arrangement of material, chap-

ters 2 and 7 presenting visions of a fourfold periodization of earth's

historical and political succession, chapters 3 and 6 depicting specific

adventures (told in characteristic "U shaped" plot) that test the faith of

Daniel and his three friends, and chapters 4 and 5 (the centerpiece of

the chiasmus) relating details illustrating divine dealings aimed at try-

ing the character of two Babylonian kings.

Structural patterning may also be observed in the balanced pro-

gression within the two halves (2-4; 5-7) of the chiasmus. Thus,

chapters 2 and 5 relate Daniel's testing in the midst of the Babylonian

wise men, chapters 3 and 6 detail the personal trials of Daniel's three

friends, and chapters 4 and 7 involve elements of personal testimony

with regard to the reception and understanding of revelatory dreams. In

addition, the close relationship of chapters 4 and 5 with their stress on

royal discipline, the fifth chapter utilizing elements narrated in the

fourth, has often been noted.16 Further, the structure of chapter 7 can

be seen to bear close affinities with the preceding court narratives, par-

ticularly those in chapters 2, 4, and 5. A still further unifying element

can be seen in that chapter 7, like chapters 1-6, features a court scene

(vv. 9-10, 13-14,26-27), this one, however, presided over by a Heav-

enly Sovereign. These data are illustrated in Table 2.

Building on these findings and adding a consideration of the first

chapter, an overall view of the structure of the book emerges that

yields a distinctive ABA pattern:

A. Historical Introduction (1) [Hebrew]

B. Historical Information (2-7) [Aramaic]

A. Future Information (7, 8-12) [Hebrew]17

 

The importance of this ancient format (observable as early as the Code

of Hammurapi18) to the unity and composition of Daniel is duly noted

by C. H. Gordon:

 

            15 Lenglet, “La structure,” 188.

            16 Gammie (“Intention and Sources,” 283) calls attention as well to “the extremely

important element of ‘prophecy fulfilled’ . . . in chapters iv and v.”

17 Note that 12:4-13 forms not only a conclusion to the vision report begun in 10:1

but also a concluding summary with instructions that serve, together with chapter 1, to

bookend the entire prophecy.

            18 The rendering of the name of the great Mesopotamian lawgiver with a “p” rather

than a “be” is now certain, the ambiguous Akkadian syllable sign (**)(= bi or pi) being

uniformly treated in this name as a p in Ugaritic (**). 



                        THE KEY ROLE OF DANIEL 7                              251

 



252                 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

 

Hammurapi's Code has a comprehensive literary form. The pro-

logue and epilogue are in poetry, whose form is parallelistic and whose

language is archaic. The laws in the middle, however, are in prose, so

that the whole composition has a pattern, which we call ABA; A being

poetry, B being prose. This has an important bearing upon other oriental

compositions including the Bible: . . . Similarly the biblical Book of

Daniel begins and ends in Hebrew, though the middle is in Aramaic. The

possibility of an intentional ABA structure deserves earnest consider-

ation and should deter us from hastily dissecting the text.19

 

Gordon's remark as to intentionality in the ABA pattern adds to the

impression gained by noting the book's structural refinements. The

cumulative effect has important implications for the unity and compo-

sition of Daniel. Rather than pointing to the unifying work of a late

redactor/compiler who stands at the end of a long line of editorial

activity, Daniel is best explained as supporting Gooding's contention

that "we must take seriously the book's internal proportions, as having

been deliberately planned by the author.”20

The key role of chapter 7 to the book of Daniel is thus readily

apparent. Its central location and close correspondence with the two

major portions make it evident that Daniel 7 is in many respects the

key that unlocks the door to the problem of the unity, as well as the

understanding, of the book. Baldwin remarks: "Looked at in relation to

the Aramaic section this chapter constitutes the climax, and it is the

high point in relation to the whole book; subsequent chapters treat only

part of the picture and concentrate on some particular aspect of it.”21

 

19 C. H. Gordon, The Ancient Near East (3d ed.; New York: Norton, 1965) 83-84.

ABA structure is, of course, a familiar feature of Old Testament writing style. See

W. G. E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry (JSOTS 26; Sheffield: University of

Sheffield, 1986) 204-7.

20 W. Gooding, "The Literary Structure of the Book of Daniel and Its Implica-

tions," TB 32 (1981): 68. Gooding's analysis, however, proceeds along more thematic,

rather than literary, lines so that his suggested structural arrangement differs significantly

from the consensus of Old Testament scholarship.

Authorial intention in the ABA structural pattern would appear to be vindicated fur-

ther by the witness of Qumran. Contrary to the view of some scholars who hold that the

complete Daniel was originally written in Aramaic with sections subsequently translated

into Hebrew, manuscripts from both Cave One and Cave Four validate the change from

Hebrew to Aramaic at 2:4b and the change from Aramaic to Hebrew at 8:1. Thus, G. Ha-

sel ("New Light on the Book of Daniel from the Dead Sea Scrolls," Archaeology and

Biblical Research 5 [1992]: 50) remarks: "The Hebrew/Aramaic Masoretic text of the

book of Daniel now has stronger support than at any other time in the history of the in-

terpretation of the book of Daniel."

21 Baldwin, Daniel, 137.



THE KEY ROLE OF DANIEL 7                              253

 

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DANIEL 7 TO DANIEL'S ESCHATOLOGY

 

The strategic structural position of chapter 7 provides a key not

only to the form of the book but to the understanding of Daniel's

eschatology. Together with the bookending chapter of its first part

(chapter 2), it gives a picture of earth's political future from Daniel's

day onward. As noted above, that prophesied future falls into a four-

fold periodization that begins with Babylon (2:36-38) and proceeds

with generally deteriorating political cohesiveness but increasing

ferocity through two more kingdoms to a fourth era, toward the end of

which a fearsome leader arises.22 During his time, the saints will be

sorely oppressed but God will accomplish his defeat and rule through

his designated leader who will reign in the midst of the saints forever

(7:13-14,18-27).

This general overview undergirds and circumscribes the further

complementary revelations that follow in chapters 8-12.23 Particularly

troublesome to harmonizing the data of those chapters with the basic

format of chapters 7 and 2 is the twofold problem of (1) the identifica-

tion of those kingdoms/eras that succeed Babylon and (2) the under-

standing of the discussions concerning the little horn and the willful

king that figure so prominently in chapters 8 and 11.

As for the former problem, chapter 8, which is set in the third year

of Belshazzar, would appear to describe two kingdoms that will suc-

ceed Babylon, kingdoms that are identified as Medo-Persia and Greece

(vv. 20-21). The vision of this chapter also tells of the rise and fall of

Greece's most prominent king (= Alexander the Great), the parceling

out of his kingdom after his demise, and the subsequent rise and

destruction of a wicked king (= Antiochus Epiphanes) who opposes

God's people (vv. 8-12, 22-25).

As for the latter problem, since the prediction concerning the

wicked king (= the little horn that grew up on the he goat) at first sight

seems to parallel that of the wicked king (= the little horn that grew up

on the fearful beast) of chapter 7 (vv. 19-25), the question arises as to

whether these two chapters are speaking of the same person. The

difficulty in deciding affirmatively for such an identification is that the

 

22 The allocating of prophetic history into episodic schemes is well known in the

ancient Near East, being attested in the Sibylline Oracles (4:49-101) and Tobit, as well

as in Greek, Roman, Persian, and Mesopotamian traditions. For details, see J. Baldwin,

"Some Literary Affinities in the Book of Daniel," TB 30 (1979): 90-92; Daniel, 55;

Goldingay, Daniel, 40-41; Di LelIa, Daniel, 29-33; and J. H. Charlesworth (ed.), The

Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; Garden City: Doubleday, 1983) 1:382.

23 For the juxtapositioning of complementary revelations as a feature of apocalyptic

literature, see Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 85-86.



254                 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

 

little horn of chapter 7 arises in the era of the fourth kingdom, while

that in chapter 8 apparently belongs to the third. To solve that problem,

many expositors suggest that the two-horned ram in the vision of chap-

ter 8, representing Media and Persia, should be harmonized with the

four kingdom sequence of chapter 7 by taking the ram as symbolizing

two successive kingdoms. The resultant four kingdom sequence can

therefore be understood as Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece. Thus,

Di Lella remarks:

 

Whereas in ch. 2 and ch. 7 there is one symbol for the kingdom of

the Medes and another for that of the Persians (2:39; 7:5-6), in ch. 8

there is a single symbol, the ram, for both these kingdoms (8:3-4, 20).

But this does not mean that the author of ch. 8 is ignorant of the "four

kingdom" concept of the rest of the book. On the one hand, both ch. 6

and the Book of Esther treat the Medes and the Persians as kindred peo-

ples in a coalition (Dan 6:9, 13; Esther 1:3; 2:14, 18; etc.); while on the

other hand, ch. 8, in which each of the two large horns of the ram sym-

bolizes a separate kingdom (cf. vs. 20), makes a distinction between the

"longer and more recent" horn, Persia, and "the other," Media (vs. 3).24

 

Such a decision, however, runs counter to Daniel's consistent

symbolic scheme. For elsewhere each animal depicts a given kingdom/

era and, while the parts of an animal may signify different persons/

events/segments within a particular kingdom/era, they never appear to

be able to be understood of entirely different kingdom/eras. Further,

within the last vision (chapters 10-12), set in the days of the second or

Persian kingdom (10:1), attention is focused once again on only the

two kingdoms of Persia and Greece (11:2-4). It would appear, then,

that while chapter 7 (combined with chapter 2) provides the basic four

epoch prophetic framework for the future, the visions of chapters 8 and

11 amplify details relative to the nearer historical scene in the days of

the second and third kingdoms.

 

24 Di LelIa, Daniel, 234; see also 212-14. Actually, those who decide for the first

and fourth kingdoms as referring to Babylon and Greece respectively are far from unan-

imous as to the identity of the second and third kingdoms. Goldingay (Daniel, 175, 176),

sensing the inherent difficulty in the problem and having surveyed various solutions to it,

concludes: "It is as certain an exegetical judgment as most that the contextual meaning

of Dan 7 is that the first empire is Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon, the fourth is Greece.

There is less certainly about the identity of the second and third kingdoms. . . . There is

little evidence to go on in identifying the second and third kingdoms, and each interpre-

tation gives a slightly artificial result. This reflects two facts. First, Daniel is not really

interested in the second and third kingdoms, and perhaps had no opinion regarding their

identity. Second, the four-empire scheme as a whole is more important than the identifi-

cation of its parts. Dan 7 is applying a well-known scheme to a period that has to begin

with the exile and end with the Antiochene crisis."



THE KEY ROLE OF DANIEL 7                              255

 

The result of these considerations is that the twofold problem can

be solved by concluding that (1) the proper identification in the four

kingdom periods is Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and a concluding

fourth kingdom/era, and (2) the little horn of chapter 8 must "be distin-

guished from the little horn of chapter 7, which came up among the ten

horns of the indescribable beast. Though they have a superficial simi-

larity, there are many differences between them and they do not belong

to the same era.”25

It may be added that the fourth of these kingdoms/eras most likely

began with Rome and stretches on to the divinely instituted kingdom.26

The appearance of the figure of a little horn in both the third and fourth

kingdoms indicates that the person involved in the third (unanimously

identified as Antiochus Epiphanes) stands either as a type or prophetic

precursor to his antitype in the fourth kingdom. Thus, chapter 8 can be

viewed as "historically fulfilled in Antiochus, but to varying degrees

foreshadowing typically the future world ruler who would dominate