Thoughts on the Book of Daniel.
Verse 14. And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Antiochus was not the only one who rose up against the infant Ptolemy. Agathocles, his prime minister, having possession of the king’s person, and conducting the affairs of the kingdom in his stead, was so dissolute and proud in the exercise of his power, that the provinces which before were subject to Egypt, rebelled; Egypt itself was disturbed by seditions; and the people of Alexandria rose up against him, causing him, his sister, his mother, and their associates to be put to death. At the same time, Philip, king of Macedon, entered into a league with Antiochus, to divide the dominions of Ptolemy between them, each proposing to take the parts which lay nearest and most convenient to him. Here was a rising up against the king of the south, sufficient to fulfill the prophecy, and the very events beyond doubt which the prophecy intended. A new power is now introduced—“the robbers of thy people,” literally, says Bp. Newton, “the breakers of thy people.” Far away on the banks of the Tiber, a kingdom has been nourishing itself with ambitious projects and dark designs. Small and weak at first, it grew with marvelous rapidity in strength and vigor, reaching out cautiously here and there to try its prowess, and test the vigor of its warlike arm, till, conscious of its power, it boldly reared its head among the nations of the earth, and seized with invincible hand the helm of their affairs. Henceforth the name of Rome stands upon the historic page, destined for long ages to control the affairs of the world, and exert a mighty influence among the nations, even to the end of time. Rome spoke; and Syria and Macedonia soon found a change coming over the aspect of their dream. The Romans interfered in behalf of the young king of Egypt, determined that he should be protected from the ruin devised by Antiochus and Philip. This was B. C. 200, and was one of the first important interferences of the Romans in the affairs of Syria and Egypt. Rollin furnishes the following succinct account of this matter: “Antiochus, king of Syria, and Philip, king of Macedonia, during the reign of Ptolemy Philopater, had discovered the strongest zeal for the interest of that monarch, and were ready to assist him on all occasions. Yet, no sooner was he dead leaving behind him an infant, whom the laws of humanity and justice enjoined them not to disturb in the possession of his father’s kingdom, than they immediately joined in a criminal alliance, and excited each other to shake off the lawful heir, and divide his dominions between them. Philip was to have Caria, Libya, Cyrenaica and Egypt; and Antiochus all the rest. With this view, the latter entered Coele-Syria and Palestine, and, in less than two campaigns, made an entire conquest of the two provinces, with all their cities and dependencies. Their guilt, says Polybius, would not have been quite so glaring, had they, like tyrants, endeavored to gloss over their crimes with some specious pretence; but so far from doing this, their injustice and cruelty were so barefaced, that to them was applied what is generally said of fishes, that the larger ones, though of the same species, prey on the lesser. One would be tempted, continues the same author, at seeing the most sacred laws of society so openly violated, to accuse Providence of being indifferent and insensible to most horrid crimes; but it fully justified his conduct, by punishing those two kings according to their deserts; and made such an example of them as ought, in all succeeding ages, to deter others from following their conduct. For while they are meditating to dispossess a weak and helpless infant of his kingdom, by piecemeal, Providence raised up the Romans against them, who entirely subverted the kingdoms of Philip and Antiochus, and reduced their successors to almost as great calamities as those with which they intended to crush the infant king.” “To establish the vision.” The Romans being more prominently than any other people, the subject of Daniel’s prophecy, their first interference in the affairs of these kingdoms is here referred to as being the establishment or demonstration of the truth of the vision which predicted the existence of such a power. “But they shall fall.” Some refer this to those mentioned in the first part of the verse who should stand up against the king of the south; others to the robbers of Daniel’s people, the Romans. It is true in either case. If those who combined against Ptolemy, are referred to, all that need be said is that they did speedily fall; and if it applies to the Romans, the prophecy simply looked forward to the period of their overthrow. Verse 15. So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any strength to withstand. The tuition of the young king of Egypt was intrusted by the Roman Senate to M. Æmilius Lepidus, who appointed Aristomenes, an old and experienced minister of that court, his guardian. His first act was to provide against the threatened invasion of the two confederated kings, Philip and Antiochus. To this end he dispatched Scopas, a famous general of Ætolia, then in the service of the Egyptians, into his native country to raise reinforcements for the army. Having equipped an army, he marched into Palestine and Coele-Syria (Antiochus being engaged in a war with Attalus in lesser Asia), and reduced all Judea into subjection to the authority of Egypt. Thus affairs were brought into a posture for the fulfillment of the verse before us. For Antiochus, desisting from his war with Attalus at the dictation of the Romans, took speedy steps for the recovery of Palestine and Coele-Syria from the hands of the Egyptians. Scopas was sent to oppose him. Near the sources of the Jordan, the two armies met. Scopas was defeated, pursued to Sidon, and there closely besieged. Three of the ablest generals of Egypt, with their best forces, were sent to raise the siege, but without success. At length Scopas, meeting in the gaunt and intangible specter of famine, a foe with whom he was unable to cope, was forced to surrender on the dishonorable terms of life only; whereupon he and his ten thousand men were suffered to depart, stripped and naked. Here was the taking of the most fenced cities by the king of the north, for Sidon was, both in its situation, and its defenses, one of the strongest cities of those times. Here was the failure of the arms of the south to withstand, and the failure also of the people which the king of the south had chosen, namely, Scopas and his Ætolian forces. Verse 16. But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him; and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. Although Egypt could not stand before Antiochus, the king of the north, Antiochus could not stand before the Romans who now came against him. No kingdoms were longer able to resist this rising power. Syria was conquered and added to the Roman Empire, when Pompey, B. C. 65, deprived Antiochus Asiaticus of his possessions, and reduced Syria to a Roman province. The same power was also to stand in the holy land and consume it. Rome became connected with the people of God, the Jews, by alliance, B. C. 161, from which date it holds a prominent place in the prophetic calendar. It did not, however, acquire jurisdiction over Judea by actual conquest till B. C. 63; and then in the following manner: On Pompey’s return from his expedition against Mithridates, king of Pontus, two competitors,37Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, were struggling for the crown of Judea. Their cause came before Pompey, who soon perceived the injustice of the claims of Aristobulus, but wished to defer decision in the matter till after his long-coveted expedition into Arabia, promising then to return and settle their affairs, as should seem just and proper. Aristobulus, fathoming Pompey’s real sentiments, hastened back to Judea, armed his subjects, and prepared for a vigorous defense, determined, at all hazards, to keep that crown which he foresaw would be adjudicated to another. Pompey closely followed the fugitive. As he approached Jerusalem, Aristobulus, beginning to repent of his course, came out to meet him, and endeavored to accommodate matters by promising entire submission, and large sums of money. Pompey, accepting this offer, sent Gabinius at the head of a detachment of soldiers, to receive the money. But when that lieutenant-general arrived at Jerusalem, he found the gates shut against him, and was told from the top of the walls that the city would not stand to the agreement. Pompey, not to be deceived in this way with impunity, put Aristobulus, whom he had retained with him, in irons, and immediately marched against Jerusalem with his whole army. The partisans of Aristobulus were for defending the place; those of Hyrcanus for opening the gates. The latter being in the majority, and prevailing, Pompey was given free entrance into the city. Whereupon the adherents of Aristobulus retired to the mountain of the temple as fully determined to defend that place, as Pompey was to reduce it. At the end of three months, a breach was made in the wall sufficient for an assault, and the place was carried at the point of the sword. In the terrible slaughter that ensued, twelve thousand persons were slain. It was an affecting sight, observes the historian, to see the priests, engaged at the time in divine service, pursue with calm hand and steady purpose, their accustomed work, apparently unconscious of the wild tumult, though all around them their friends were being given to the slaughter, and though often their own blood mingled with that of their sacrifices. Having put an end to the war, Pompey demolished the walls of Jerusalem, transferred several cities from the jurisdiction of Judea to that of Syria, and imposed tribute on the Jews. Thus for the first time was Jerusalem placed by conquest in the hands of that power which was to hold the “glorious land” in its iron grasp till utterly consumed.