p. 3 | A. G. DANIELLS by Arthur G. Daniells

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D.C. · Feb 12, 1914

A. G. DANIELLS

By Arthur G. Daniells

Does the History of Turkey and Egypt Since 1798 Fulfill the Prophecy of Daniel 11: 40-44?—No. 17

A. G. DANIELLS

NUMBER 16 of this series of articles on Dan. 11: 40-44 appeared in the REVIEW of May 8, 1913. In resuming these studies, a brief review will serve as a helpful connecting link between what has been given and that which is to follow.

The prophecy set forth in the last six verses of the eleventh chapter of Daniel, may be separated into three parts:—

First, the conflict at “the time of the end” between the “king of the south,” the “king of the north,” and another power designated by the pronoun him, with the result that the king of the north comes out of the struggle the victor. Verse 40.

Second, the continuation and extension of the triumphs of the king of the north over “many countries,”—the glorious land (Syria), Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, and the adjacent regions. Verses 41-43.

Third, serious reverses of the king of the north, resulting, first in the loss of independence, and finally in complete overthrow and extinction. Verses 44, 45.

The conclusions reached in the preceding studies are as follows:—

1. That “the time of the end” began in 1798.

2. That the “king of the south” at that time was Egypt.

3. That the “king of the north” was Turkey.

4. That the power represented by the pronoun “him” was France.

In tracing the history of these countries at that time, we found,—

1. That in 1798 France invaded Egypt for the purpose of conquest, and that Egypt offered the most determined resistance, but went down in the struggle.

2. That in the year 1798 Turkey declared war on France, assembled a land army of 30,000 at Damascus, and a navy of 30,000 at Rhodes, to engage the French, and that at the close of the terrible struggle between these forces in Syria, Turkey was the victor.

3. That following the victory over the French at St. Jean d’Acre, Turkey promptly and resolutely extended her rule over Syria, Egypt, Arabia, Ethiopia, and Libya, and thus gained power, or control, over the “treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt,” to a far greater extent than ever before.

In the year 1825 Turkey was complete master of all the countries in the south, and was exacting heavy tribute from them to restore her depleted treasury at Constantinople.

A Change Foretold

It is here, at this point, that the prophecy foretells trouble for Turkey: “But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many. And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.” Dan. 11: 44, 45.

This part of the prophecy predicts serious reverses for this power, which, up to this point, was to be victorious in repulsing the French invaders, and in reestablishing and even extending its control over the countries of the south.

And with a change in the fortunes of Turkey there is also to be a change in the place of operations. “Tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him.” Immediately preceding this the conflicts were in the south,—Palestine, Egypt, and Ethiopia. Now the scene shifts to the eastern and northern parts of the empire. The eastern part is Syria, Armenia, and Asia Minor. The northern is the Balkan territory extending northward from Constantinople to the Danube. It is in these regions that the Turk will find the enemy encroaching upon his territory, and threatening his existence. It is into these parts that the armies will be sent under the furious commands of their ruler “to destroy and utterly to make away many.” But they will not succeed. In this long struggle Turkey will go down in defeat, and “come to his end.”

As we believe and teach that verse 44 predicts Turkish reverses that will result in the transfer of the capital from Constantinople to Jerusalem, and, in the end, the overthrow and extinction of the empire, we ought surely to give the history of the period and the events referred to the most careful study. This period began about 1825. Of the general conditions Turkey was facing at that time Creasy says:—

“Peril from Russia, peril from England, peril from mutinous Janizaries, and factious ulema; peril from many-headed insurrection among Wahabis, Mamelukes, Servians, Albanians, Greeks, Druses, Kurds, Syrians, and Egyptians; peril from rebellious pashas, who would fain have founded new kingdoms on the ruins of the house of Othman,—such were some of the clouds that hung over the reign of Mahmud, the second sultan of that name, and the thirtieth of his dynasty [whose reign extended from 1808 to 1839].”—“History of the Ottoman Turks,” Vol. II, page 39.

Another writer says:—

“In this concurrence of domestic revolt and foreign war, at a period of the decline of her political institutions, Turkey was like a ship in a storm, whosecrew were in a mutiny, and whose tackle was worthless and worn out. But, in the midst of this tremendous crisis, the gigantic political figure of Sultan Mahmud appeared at the post of the pilot, weathering the storm with a genius and an energy that challenges the admiration and sympathy of the world. From north, south, east, and west, the elements seemed to gather themselves together for a final effort which should engulf the Ottoman vessel of state; but it was not written in the book of fate that the hour of the break-up was arrived.”—“History of the Egyptian Revolution,” by Paton, Vol. II, page 92.

While the historian tells of troubles in all parts of the Turkish Empire, the prophet points to the east and the north only. It was in these parts that he foresaw the most serious and perilous developments. It was the “tidings out of the east and out of the north” that troubled and alarmed the government, and caused it to send forth its armies to meet the enemy. This is what is foretold by the prophet, and it is what is recorded by the historian.