Chapter 7

• In the first year of Belshazzar, king of Babylon, Daniel had a dream and visions in his mind while lying in bed. He later wrote down the dream and narrated the main events.

…

• I, Daniel, was troubled in spirit, and the visions in my head terrified me.

…

• I approached one of those standing nearby and asked him to give me a thorough explanation of all these things. He spoke to me and interpreted them as follows:

…

• Here the words end. I, Daniel, was deeply disturbed by my thoughts and my face turned pale; but I kept these words in my heart."

Babylon between Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar

Following the death of Nebuchadnezzar in 562 BCE, Babylon entered a period of political and religious instability, which had a profound impact on the empire. Nebuchadnezzar II was a strong leader, known for his military conquests and impressive urban development, including the construction of Babylon’s walls and the famed Hanging Gardens. However, his disappearance ushered in an era marked by rapid changes in reign and internal tensions.

The succession of kings after Nebuchadnezzar

The first to follow him on the throne was his son, Amel-Marduk, also known as Evil-Merodach, mentioned in the Bible for his act of freeing Jehoiachin, the king of Judah, from prison (2 Kings 25:27-30). However, his reign was short, lasting only two years (562–560 BCE), and he was assassinated in a court conspiracy.

Neriglissar, Nebuchadnezzar's son-in-law, succeeded Amel-Marduk. He managed to maintain stability for a period of four years (560–556 BCE), though his reign was not marked by significant achievements. After his death, the throne was taken by his son, Labashi-Marduk, but his reign was extremely short, being removed and assassinated after just a few months.

The rise of Nabonidus and coregency with Belshazzar

In 556 BCE, after the removal of Labashi-Marduk, Nabonidus ascended the throne. Unlike his predecessors, Nabonidus was more concerned with religion than politics or military affairs. A notable aspect of his reign was his devotion to the moon god Sin, at the expense of the traditional worship of the god Marduk, the chief protector of Babylon. This caused tensions with the priests and the religious elite of Babylon, creating a religious schism that weakened the political cohesion of the empire.

Nabonidus chose to retreat for an extended period to Harran, an important city for the worship of Sin, leaving the day-to-day governance of Babylon in the hands of his son, Belshazzar. Although Nabonidus was still the official king, Belshazzar became the effective ruler of Babylon in his father’s absence. However, both Nabonidus and Belshazzar were considered weak leaders, unable to provide stability and prosperity to the kingdom.

Religious and political tensions

During this period, although Babylon was strong politically and militarily, it was increasingly vulnerable internally. The tensions between the worship of Marduk and that of Sin, supported by Nabonidus, undermined confidence in royal authority. In his father's absence, Belshazzar failed to gain the respect of the nobles and priests, being perceived as a leader lacking charisma and competence.

Context of Daniel's vision

In this climate of instability, the prophet Daniel receives his visions, which foretell dramatic changes in the world order. Chapter 7 of the Book of Daniel begins in a period of decline for Babylon, when the empire, although seemingly strong, was beginning to disintegrate from within. This political and religious disorder provided the perfect backdrop for Daniel’s prophetic messages, which anticipated the end of Babylonian domination and the emergence of new powerful empires on the historical stage.

Daniel's age at the time of the vision

In the first year of Belshazzar’s reign, when Daniel had this vision, he was probably around 68 years old. Considering that Daniel was taken to Babylon as a captive at about the age of 15 in 605 BCE, and the vision occurred in 553 BCE, we can calculate that he was already an elderly man of 68 years with extensive prophetic experience.

Despite his advanced age, the impact of the vision on him was profound. Although Daniel had already lived through many prophetic experiences and witnessed numerous divine revelations, this specific vision deeply affected him both spiritually and emotionally. This underscores the gravity and significance of the vision, as well as Daniel's ongoing spiritual sensitivity at this stage of his life.

Daniel's vision: A dream of deep significance

Daniel's vision is described as a "dream," but it had a profound impact on his mind, transcending mere dream imagery and becoming a divine communication with essential implications. Comparing this episode with Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in chapter 2, we can observe some interesting similarities and differences.

Comparing the Dream of Daniel with that of Nebuchadnezzar

The dream of Daniel and that of Nebuchadnezzar both present significant prophetic experiences, but there are key elements that distinguish them:

Origin of the visions:

• Daniel 7: Daniel himself has the dream and visions. They appear directly in his mind, indicating a personal and deep connection with the divinity. The message is received directly by him, without the mediation of others.
• Daniel 2: In contrast, Nebuchadnezzar had a troubling dream that he could not understand. Although the dream was sent by God, he was neither able to remember it nor interpret it and sought help from his wise men. Ultimately, it was Daniel who told him both the dream and its interpretation.

Reaction of the dreamer:

• Daniel 7: Although Daniel's initial reaction is not detailed, we are later told that the vision deeply troubled him. This shows that, although Daniel was accustomed to spiritual experiences, the message received in this dream had a particularly strong impact on him, being difficult to understand without further explanation.
• Daniel 2: Nebuchadnezzar, on the other hand, was immediately disturbed and uneasy about his dream. He did not understand its significance at all, which led him to seek interpretations from the wisest men of his court. Without Daniel, the king would not have been able to understand the divine message.

Nature of the dream and interpretation:

• Daniel 7: Daniel's dream is highly symbolic and complex. It contains images such as beasts and thrones, which require careful interpretation to decipher the divine message hidden within them. Daniel, although the recipient of the dream, needs to seek an explanation for a complete understanding of it.
• Daniel 2: Nebuchadnezzar's dream is simpler in structure, representing a giant statue made of various metals, each symbolizing an empire. In this case, Daniel acts as the interpreter of the dream, revealing the meaning that had so troubled the king.

Relationship of the dreamer with God:

• Daniel 7: Daniel, as a prophet of God, is a direct channel for divine revelation. The vision comes without him asking for it, being a manifestation of God's plan. Daniel does not need to consult others to understand the origin of the dream, only to clarify certain details.
• Daniel 2: Nebuchadnezzar, though a powerful king, did not have a spiritual relationship with the God of Israel. Therefore, his dream, although important, required the intervention of a prophet, in this case Daniel, to decipher the divine message. For Nebuchadnezzar, the dream was a way for God to reveal truths that he would not have understood otherwise.

Impact and significance of the dreams:

• Daniel 7: Daniel's vision holds significant eschatological value. It looks not just at earthly empires to come, but also at the final establishment of God's kingdom. The message conveyed through this dream is of great spiritual importance, referring to the end of the worldly order and the establishment of divine rule.
• Daniel 2: Nebuchadnezzar's dream also has a prophetic character, but it is more oriented towards the immediate succession of empires after Babylon. It illustrates the fragility of human power and the inevitability of God’s eternal kingdom.

Physical and emotional reactions

In chapter 7, after Daniel has the first vision, the text tells us: “My thoughts greatly troubled me and my face changed color” (Daniel 7:28). This detail highlights the overwhelming emotional impact of the vision. The change in face color is a clear physical indicator of the stress and shock experienced by Daniel. The vision is not just an abstract mental experience, but it has a concrete effect on his physical state. Additionally, it is important to note that Daniel chose to keep the words of the vision "in his heart," suggesting that he needed time to fully process and understand what he had seen before sharing the revelation with others.

Similarly, in chapter 8, Daniel has an even more intense reaction. After the vision in the third year of Belshazzar's reign, he says: “I, Daniel, was exhausted and lay ill for several days; then I got up and attended to the king’s business. I was appalled by the vision, and no one understood it” (Daniel 8:27). This description underscores that visions are not just a spiritual experience but have a strong effect on the body. Daniel is overwhelmed by the intensity of the experience, even falling ill, and needs a period of recovery before resuming his duties.

The Vision in Daniel's Youth

In Daniel 2, when Daniel was still young, we encounter an urgent crisis situation. King Nebuchadnezzar was ready to execute all the wise men of Babylon, as none could reveal and interpret his dream. In this urgent context, God revealed to Daniel the mystery of Nebuchadnezzar's dream in a "night vision." Daniel's reaction is completely different from those he has later in life.

• Reaction of joy and gratitude: Daniel is not overwhelmed or weakened by this vision; rather, he is filled with joy and energy. Instead of being physically affected, he responds with an outburst of gratitude and praise to God: "Blessed be the name of God forever and ever; wisdom and power are His" (Daniel 2:20). Daniel humbly acknowledges that God has given him the wisdom necessary to save the lives of the wise men of Babylon.

• Immediate action: After the vision, Daniel does not remain idle. He acts quickly and decisively, going to Arioch to stop the execution of the wise men and to reveal the interpretation of the dream to the king. This reaction is one of energy and determination, characteristic of a young man full of vigor and faith that God will support him in what he needs to do.

• Emotional context: At the time of the vision, Daniel was in an extremely pressing situation. The vision not only revealed the mystery of the king's dream but also provided a life-saving solution for him and the others. His positive and prompt reaction is reflected by the urgency of the situation and his essential role in stopping a tragedy.

Visions in Daniel's Old Age

In Daniel 7 and Daniel 8, things are quite different. Daniel is much older, around 68-70 years old, and the visions he receives during this period are much more complex and disturbing. Unlike the vision in his youth, which provided an immediate solution to an urgent problem, these visions are apocalyptic in nature, involving events of immense magnitude concerning the future of humanity.

• Reaction of disturbance and weakness: In Daniel 7, after the vision received, Daniel confesses that "my thoughts greatly troubled me and my face changed color" (Daniel 7:28). Also, in Daniel 8, the reaction is even more intense: "I, Daniel, was exhausted and lay ill for several days" (Daniel 8:27). These reactions emphasize the overwhelming impact these visions had on him, both physically and emotionally. The vision did not energize him; instead, it weakened and deeply disturbed him.

• Complexity and gravity of the visions: The visions in chapters 7 and 8 are much harder to understand and involve prophecies about catastrophic and apocalyptic events. Unlike the mystery of Nebuchadnezzar's dream, these visions do not offer an immediate solution but reveal a worrying future filled with dramatic events for the entire world. The weight of the content of the visions seems to have overwhelmed Daniel and physically affected him.

• Age and physical condition: Daniel, being of advanced age, was much more vulnerable to the stress these revelations brought. The intense physical reactions might be partially linked to his age, but also to the apocalyptic nature of the visions, which imposed an immense burden on him.

Differences Between the Visions and Circumstances of the Reactions

Not every vision must cause physical weakness or intense reaction. The way Daniel reacts to his visions depends on several factors, including:

• Content of the vision: The visions in Daniel's youth, like the one in Daniel 2, have a more "positive" character in the sense that they bring immediate solutions to serious problems. In contrast, the visions in Daniel 7 and 8 involve disturbing prophecies about the future, much harder to understand and process.

• Urgency of the situation: In the case of his youth vision, Daniel's prompt and energetic reaction is driven by the urgency of saving the lives of Babylon's wise men. The visions in old age do not demand immediate action but rather require time for reflection and understanding.

• Age and physical capacity: Being young, Daniel was able to react with strength and energy to the vision, but in old age, his body no longer had the same resilience to the emotional and spiritual stress these apocalyptic visions provoked.

Differences Between the Static Dream and the Dynamic Visions

• The Dream in Chapter 2:This vision of a statue made of different metals, where each metal represents an empire, is a relatively simple scene. Even though it has great implications, the dream does not contain much dynamism or strong dramatic elements. Apart from the stone that shatters the statue, the rest of the scene is rather static and straightforward. The message conveyed is direct, without additional complications or frightening images. This simplicity of the dream also leads to a less intense emotional reaction from Daniel.

• The Visions in Chapters 7 and 8:In contrast, the visions that Daniel receives in chapters 7 and 8 are extremely dynamic and terrifying. They depict fantastic beasts with multiple heads and horns, engaged in conflicts and battles. The images are symbolic but much harder to understand and cause a high level of distress. These visions are similar to scenes from a horror movie, where drama and tension reach their peak. Daniel is not just a spectator of these events; he feels directly involved, as if he were "present" in the midst of the action, which intensifies his emotional experience.

The Elements That Inspire Fear: The Small Horns

In both visions from chapters 7 and 8, Daniel witnesses the appearance of monstrous beings, but a central element that captures his attention is the emergence of small horns.

• Chapter 7:Daniel sees four terrifying beasts, each with dreadful characteristics. Among them, the fourth beast is particularly frightening, having ten horns, from which a "little horn" emerges. This little horn speaks great things and exercises an unusual power. It symbolizes a force that will persecute the saints and challenge divine order. This symbolic element deeply intrigued Daniel, causing him to pay special attention to its actions.

• Chapter 8:In the next vision, another small horn appears, associated with a beast that dominates the scene. This horn not only symbolizes an oppressive power but also acts against heaven and the truth. The appearance of this common symbol in both visions emphasizes its importance in Daniel’s prophecy and its major role in the fate of humanity. Daniel is not only troubled by these symbols but feels the need to learn as much as possible about their meaning, demonstrating his active involvement in deciphering the visions.

Daniel’s Active Involvement in the Visions

Daniel is not merely a passive observer of these dramatic visions. In both instances, he actively engages, asking questions and seeking understanding. He realizes that his role is not just to witness these revelations but also to comprehend them in order to share their message with humanity.

• Desire for Understanding:The little horn, the recurring element in both visions, becomes a focal point of curiosity and clarification for Daniel. He understands that this symbol is essential for the future of humanity and is determined to gather as much information about it as possible. This pursuit of understanding highlights Daniel’s deep involvement in the process of divine revelation, knowing that his mission is to be not only a receiver of these prophecies but also an interpreter who faithfully conveys them.

The Emotional Impact and Daniel’s Mission

The dramatic and intense scenes Daniel witnesses in these visions have a profound effect on him. He is not only a witness to terrifying events but also feels an immense burden, knowing that these revelations are meant for all of humanity. Unlike the dream in chapter 2, which was simpler and easier to explain, the visions in chapters 7 and 8 are much more complex and disturbing. The impact of these visions on Daniel is evident through his physical reactions, which reflect how deeply they affected him emotionally.

• Patience and Divine Mandate:Although Daniel is aware of the significance of these visions, he does not rush to share them immediately. He knows that he must wait until he receives a clear mandate from God to reveal these messages. This patience and sense of responsibility highlight Daniel’s spiritual maturity, as he understands that his message is not just for himself but holds global significance and must be communicated with care and precision.

Daniel’s Account of His Vision:

• "In my vision at night, I saw the four winds of heaven stirring up the Great Sea.
• And four great beasts came up out of the sea, each different from the other.
  ...
• These four great beasts are four kings who shall arise from the earth."

God’s Sovereignty and Prophetic Events

In Daniel 7:2, the prophet describes a scene in which the four winds of heaven burst forth upon the Great Sea, causing agitation. This turmoil results in the emergence of four great beasts, each distinct from the others. The text does not explicitly mention who caused the winds to rise, but we can focus on Daniel’s observations and the symbolic meanings behind these elements.

God’s Sovereignty in the Events of the Vision

An important aspect of biblical theology is that nothing happens without God’s will or permission. Even though the text does not specify who stirred the winds, we understand that these events occur under God's supervision. In other biblical passages, whether God acts directly or simply allows events to unfold, everything happens under His sovereign rule. Although Daniel does not describe direct actions from God, the overall scene suggests a divine plan unfolding.

This idea is frequently found in prophetic writings. God controls world events, either through direct intervention or by allowing certain forces to act in the world to fulfill His divine purposes. The fact that Daniel does not specify whocauses the winds to burst leaves room for interpretation—that this occurs either through divine intervention or divine permission.

The Four Winds and the Great Sea: The Symbolism of Global Movements

The four winds of heaven are a common biblical symbol associated with powerful forces that influence the entire world. They can represent political, social, or natural movements that affect nations and kingdoms. When these winds burst upon the Great Sea, the symbol becomes clear: these are global movements that shake the entire world, leading to unrest and conflict.

The Great Sea, in turn, is a symbol of the peoples and nations of the world. In the Bible, the sea often represents chaos, instability, and the conflicts that characterize relations among nations. When the Great Sea becomes turbulent under the influence of the winds, it describes a period of global upheaval from which the kingdoms of the world arise, represented by the beasts in the vision.

The Beasts – The Kingdoms of the World

From this sea, stirred by the winds of heaven, Daniel sees four great beasts emerge, each different from the others. The beasts symbolize the kingdoms that rise in world history, influenced by globalizing forces and political and social changes.

The emergence of the beasts from the sea shows that the kingdoms of the world are born out of instability and the conflicts that characterize international relations. However, even though the text does not specify whostirred the winds, the message is clear: whether God acts directly or simply allows events to unfold, He controls the rise and fall of kingdoms.

• "The first was like a lion and had the wings of an eagle. I watched until its wings were torn off, and it was lifted from the ground so that it stood on two feet like a human, and the heart of a man was given to it."(Daniel 7:4)

The Winged Lion

In the vision of Daniel 7:4, the lion with eagle’s wings, whose wings are plucked, and who is given "the heart of a man,"has a deep connection with the supernatural experience of Nebuchadnezzar, as described in Daniel 4. This symbolic transformation reflects both the personal change of Nebuchadnezzar and the decline of the Babylonian Empire after his death.

1. Nebuchadnezzar’s Transformation from a Beast to a Man

In Daniel 4, God punishes Nebuchadnezzar, and his “human heart” is turned into a “beast’s heart” for seven years. During this time, he lives like an animal, losing his sanity and behaving as a beast. This period represents a moment of profound humiliation for Nebuchadnezzar, reflecting the harsh lesson he had to learn: that all his power and authority came from God, not from his own person or earthly achievements.

After seven years, Nebuchadnezzar regains his "human heart"—a symbol of the restoration of his mind and his recognition of God’s sovereignty. At the end of this period, he acknowledges that he is a man subject to God and that despite his power, he remains only a part of the divine plan. This is not a weakness but rather a humble acceptanceof the reality of human nature and the fact that all authority belongs to God.

2. The Brief Transformation and Babylon’s Decline

Nebuchadnezzar, after recognizing his limitations and accepting God’s sovereignty, experienced only a short period of "humanization" at the end of his life. After his death, rather than continuing on the path of humility and divine acknowledgment, his successors returned to idolatrous practices and political corruption. In less than 14 yearsafter Nebuchadnezzar’s death, Babylon fell under the domination of Medo-Persia.

This temporary transformation—from a dominant and fierce kingdom to a humanized form—reflects the decline of Babylon’s power.

The plucking of the lion’s wingsin Daniel’s vision symbolizes the loss of strength and rapid declineof Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar’s successors. Even though Nebuchadnezzar underwent a personal transformation, it did not last long and was not continued by his heirs.

3. The Meaning of the “Human Heart” in Daniel’s Vision

When Daniel’s vision states that the beast was given “a human heart”, this directly refers to the humanization of Nebuchadnezzar after his supernatural experience. This change does not symbolize weakness but rather the acceptance of human nature and divine sovereignty, just as Nebuchadnezzar came to understand before his death.

However, this moment of humanization was short-lived. After Nebuchadnezzar’s death, Babylon continued to decline under the rule of Nabonidus and Belshazzar, who failed to learn the lesson of humility that Nebuchadnezzar had experienced. Instead of following the path of recognizing God, they led the empire into moral and political decay, which ultimately resulted in Babylon’s downfall.

4. The Historical and Political Context of Babylon

At the time Daniel received this vision, Babylon was already undergoing a process of transformation and decline. Nabonidus, the king of Babylon, had retreated to Taymato focus on religious reforms, leaving his son, Belshazzar, to govern. During this period, Babylon became vulnerable politically and militarily. This weakness was exploited by Medo-Persia, which conquered Babylon in 539 BCE, shortly after Daniel’s vision.

Daniel’s vision, describing a lion whose wings were plucked and who was given a "human heart,"reflects this period of transition and decline. It illustrates both Nebuchadnezzar’s personal transformationand the fall of the Babylonian Empire after his death. Babylon, once a dominant world power, was about to be replaced by a new global empire.

• "And behold, another beast, a second one, like a bear; it was raised up on one side, and it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. And they said to it, ‘Arise, devour much flesh!’"(Daniel 7:5)

The Bear in Daniel’s Vision

In Daniel 7:5, Daniel describes a second beast, "like a bear,"which "was raised up on one side"and had "three ribs in its mouth between its teeth."This beast is commanded, "Arise, devour much flesh,"suggesting an aggressive and conquering nature. The symbolism of this beast is associated with the Medo-Persian Empire, which succeeded Babylon after its fall. Let’s explore the details of this description and its historical and prophetic implications.

1. The Bear – A Symbol of Medo-Persia

The bearis a massive, powerful animal known for its brutality. Unlike the lion, the symbol of Babylon in the first vision, the bearrepresents a force that is slower but relentless. The Medo-Persian Empire is well represented by this symbol because of its gradual yet aggressive expansion. Medo-Persia was not an empire known for the speed of its conquests, but it was a dominant powerthat devoured many nations through military campaigns.

The Medo-Persian Empire was formed through an alliance between the Medes and the Persians, under the leadership of Cyrus the Great. Although it initially began as a balanced partnership, the Persians quickly became dominant, a fact reflected in the imagery of the bear.

2. "Raised Up on One Side"

The expression that the bear "was raised up on one side"may indicate the asymmetry within the Medo-Persian Empire, where the Persians became more dominant than the Medes. Initially, the Medes and Persians formed an equal alliance, but over time, power shifted in favor of the Persians, under the rule of Cyrus and his successors.

This description of the bear leaning to one sideperfectly reflects the unequal balance of powerbetween the Medes and Persians. Although the empire was formed as a coalition, the Persians took a leading role in governance, military control, and political dominance.

3. The Three Ribs Between Its Teeth

The bearhas three ribs in its mouth, a significant detailthat refers to the major conquests achieved by the Medo-Persian Empire. The ribs between its teethsymbolize the nations conquered and subduedduring its expansion.

Most biblical scholars agree that these three ribsrepresent the three key conqueststhat established Medo-Persian dominance:

• Lydia (Asia Minor, conquered in 546 BCE)

• Babylon (conquered in 539 BCE)

• Egypt (conquered in 525 BCE by Cambyses, son of Cyrus the Great)

These conquests marked the territorial expansion of the empire and were decisive in consolidating its dominance. The ribssymbolize the nations defeated and consumedby Medo-Persian power, illustrating the empire’s brutal expansion.

4. "Arise, Devour Much Flesh!"

This command given to the bear reflects the expansionist appetiteof Medo-Persia. The empire was eager to conquer and assimilate new territories, particularly under the leadership of Cyrus the Greatand his successors. The phrase "devour much flesh"signifies the devouring of nations, brutal conquests, and the absorption of peoples into the empire. Although Medo-Persia was relatively tolerant in religious and cultural policies, its conquests were marked by military aggression and forced assimilation.

Medo-Persia, despite offering religious freedom and fair governance, expanded through bloody wars. Thus, the image of the bear devouring fleshreflects the ruthless nature of the empire’s expansion.

5. Historical Context: The Medo-Persian Empire

The Medo-Persian Empire, which dominated the ancient world after the fall of Babylon, became one of the greatest powers of its time. Founded by Cyrus the Great, the empire conquered Babylon in 539 BCEand rapidly expanded, incorporating territories from Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, Persia, and Egypt. Although this empire was known for its policy of tolerancetoward conquered peoples, its expansion was marked by harsh military campaigns.

Cyrus is also famous for his policy of liberating exiled peoples, including the Jews, whom he allowed to return to the Holy Landand rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. This policy was a remarkable aspect of his rule, but it should not be forgotten that Medo-Persia’s military expansion was aggressive and relentless.

The Medo-Persian Empirewas much larger in size and population compared to the Babylonian Empire, both at the time of Babylon’s conquest and at its peak.

Size of Babylon at the Time of Its Conquest

The Babylonian Empire, under Nebuchadnezzar and his successors, was relatively limited in size compared to later empires.

• At its peak, its territory covered approximately 500,000 – 800,000 km².
• The estimated populationof the Babylonian Empire was around 10 million people.
• The empire was mainly concentrated in Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq)but also included parts of Syria, Palestine, and other regions of the Near East.
• Although it was a significant empire, especially culturally and militarily, its territory was not vast compared to Medo-Persia.

Size of the Medo-Persian Empire at the Time of Babylon’s Conquest (539 BCE)

At the time of Babylon’s conquest, the Medo-Persian Empire, under Cyrus the Great, was already significantly larger than Babylon.

• The territory of the Medo-Persian Empireat that time was approximately 2.5 million km², making it about three times larger than Babylon in territorial extent.
• The estimated populationwas around 20-30 million people, meaning it had two to three times more inhabitantsthan Babylon.

This confirms that at the time of Babylon’s fall, Medo-Persia was about three times larger in both land area and population.

The Peak of the Medo-Persian Empire

The Medo-Persian Empirereached its greatest extentunder Darius the Great (522-486 BCE) and Xerxes I (486-465 BCE), becoming one of the largest political entities in history.

• At its peak, the empire covered approximately 5.5 million km², making it 5-6 times largerthan the Babylonian Empire.
• The populationof the Medo-Persian Empire at its height is estimated at 50-60 million people, which means it had 5-6 times more inhabitants than Babylon.

The Medo-Persian Empire stretched from the Aegean Sea in the west (including parts of Greece and Anatolia)to the Indus Valley in the east (modern Pakistan and northwest India), including Egypt, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, and Iran. It was one of the largest empires in history, dominating much of the known world for approximately 200 years.

• "After this, I looked, and behold, another beast, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings like a bird; the beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it."(Daniel 7:6)

The Leopard in Daniel’s Vision

In Daniel 7:6, the leopard with four wings and four headsrepresents the Greek Empire, particularly under the rule of Alexander the Great. This description highlights the astonishing speedwith which Greece conquered the Medo-Persian Empireand other territories, as well as the division of the empireafter Alexander’s death.

1. The Leopard with Four Wings – The Speed of Greek Conquests

The leopardis the perfect symbol for Greece, due to the speed and agilitywith which Alexander the Greatmanaged to conquer vast territories. Compared to the lion (Babylon)and the bear (Medo-Persia), which represent strength and brute force, the leopard with four wingssuggests an exceptionally swift and efficient conquest. The additional wingsindicate an even greater speed than that of Babylon, emphasizing the lightning-fast expansionof Greece.

In just a few years (336–323 BCE), Alexanderdefeated the entire Medo-Persian Empire, expanding Greek rule from Greece to India, covering vast regions across Europe, Asia, and Africa. This expansion was achieved in an extremely short time, demonstrating the tactical superiority of Alexander’s army.

2. The Four Heads – The Division of the Empire After Alexander’s Death

After Alexander’s untimely deathin 323 BCE, his vast empire was divided among his four main generals (the Diadochi), marking the fragmentation of Greek ruleinto four distinct kingdoms:

• Cassander– Macedonia and Greece
• Lysimachus– Thrace and part of Asia Minor
• Seleucus– Syria and the East (Mesopotamia, Persia)
• Ptolemy– Egypt

The symbolism of the four headsperfectly reflects this territorial division, which led to the political and military instabilityof the Greek Empire, despite the grandeur of its conquests.

3. Greece Compared to Medo-Persia

At the beginning of Alexander’s campaigns, Greecewas significantly smallerthan the Medo-Persian Empire.

• Before Alexander’s conquests, Greece was composed of city-states(Athens, Sparta, Macedonia) with a total territory of approximately 150,000–200,000 km².
• In contrast, the Medo-Persian Empirespanned 5.5 million km², making it 30 times larger than Greecein territorial extent and with a much larger population.

This huge disparity between Greece and Medo-Persiamakes Alexander’s rapid conquest even more remarkable. Despite being a much smaller entity, Alexandermanaged to become a global conquerorthrough advanced military strategiesand an elite mobile force.

4. Dominion Given to Greece

The phrase “dominion was given to it”reflects, from a biblical perspective, that Greece’s rise to power and its conquests were not merely human achievements but also part of a divine plan. In this vision, world dominion passes from one empire to another, and Greecewas the instrument chosen to replace Medo-Persiain God’s prophetic timeline.

Ancient Greece – The Military

Ancient Greece was composed of multiple independent city-states, each with its own form of government and military organization. Among them, Sparta and Athensstood out for their exceptional military disciplines. During the time of Alexander the Great, the Greek army, especially the Macedonian army, became one of the most efficient and feared military forces in the world.

1. The Macedonian Phalanx and Soldier Training

The Macedonian phalanx was the backbone of Alexander’s army. This infantry formation consisted of tight ranks of soldiers (hoplites) equipped with sarissas (long spears measuring 4–6 meters) and shields. The soldiers in the front line held their spears horizontally, forming an impenetrable barrier against enemy cavalry and infantry.

The training of Macedonian soldierswas extremely rigorous. Alexander demanded that his soldiers be not only physically well-prepared but also function as a unified force. Additionally, they were trained in hand-to-hand combat techniques and the use of various weapons. They were accustomed to rapid maneuvers and could maintain formation under enemy pressure.

2. Military Tactics Used to Defeat Medo-Persia

Alexander the Greatis considered one of the greatest military strategists in history, and the conquest of the Medo-Persian Empireis among his greatest achievements. Although the Persians had a much larger army, Alexander defeated them through a combination of maneuverability, innovative tactics, and the effective use of cavalry.

Key Battles:

• Battle of Issus (333 BCE):This was one of Alexander’s first major victories against the Persian army, led by Darius III. In this battle, Alexander used his Hetairoi cavalry to strike the Persian flanks, forcing Darius to flee. This strategy demoralized the Persian army and led to a decisive victory.

• Battle of Gaugamela (331 BCE):Considered one of Alexander’s greatest military achievements, this battle marked the end of the Medo-Persian Empire. Although Darius had a numerically superior army, Alexander used deceptive maneuvers and a direct strike at the enemy center. He managed to create a gap in the Persian line and disorganize their army, securing a historic victory.

3. The Period of Hellenization

After Alexander the Great’s death in 323 BCE, his vast empire entered a period known as Hellenization. This was the process through which Greek culture was imposed or adoptedin the conquered territories. Hellenization had a significant impacton the culture, philosophy, and political structureof the former Medo-Persian Empire.

Key Characteristics of Hellenization:

• The Greek language became the international language of commerce and administration, facilitating cultural exchanges and unifying diverse populations within the former Persian Empire.
• Greek philosophy spread across the region, with schools such as Stoicism and Epicureanism gaining popularity. The ideas of Aristotle, Alexander’s teacher, profoundly influenced political and philosophical thought.
• The founding of Hellenistic cities, such as Alexandria in Egypt, which became a major center of education and Hellenistic culture.

4. Antiochus Epiphanes and Forced Hellenization

Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a Seleucid king (215–164 BCE), is known for his attempt to impose Hellenism by force, particularly in Judea. He sought to enforce Greek culture and religion, replacing Jewish religious practices with Hellenistic ones.

Decrees of Antiochus Epiphanes:

• Antiochus ordered the prohibition of Jewish religious practices, including observance of the Sabbath and circumcision.
• He commanded the installation of a statue of Zeusin the Temple of Jerusalem and offered impure sacrifices, sparking a major revolt among the Jews.

His actions led to the Maccabean Revolt (167–160 BCE), in which the Jews fought to regain their religious freedom. This resulted in the rededication of the Temple and the establishment of the Hanukkah festival. Ultimately, Antiochus Epiphanes’ policy of forced Hellenization failed, but it caused significant suffering and conflict in the region.

The four kingdoms and the reasons for their disappearance

After the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC, his vast empire was divided among his generals, known as the Diadochi. They fought for control over the territories, and the empire fragmented into four major kingdoms, each ruled by one of these generals. Here is a brief history of the four kingdoms and the reasons for their disappearance:

1. The Kingdom of Macedonia (Ruled by Cassander)

Cassander, one of Alexander's generals, took control of Macedonia and Greece, declaring himself King of Macedonia in 305 BC. Although Cassander managed to consolidate his power, his kingdom entered a period of instability after his death in 297 BC.

• Peak and decline: After Cassander's death, Macedonia was weakened by succession struggles and internal conflicts. Despite this, the kingdom remained a regional power until its confrontation with the Roman Republic.

• Disappearance: Macedonia was defeated by the Romans at the Battle of Pydna in 168 BC, during the reign of Perseus, the last king of Macedonia. The defeat at the hands of the Roman general Lucius Aemilius Paullus led to Macedonia being transformed into a Roman province.

• Reason for disappearance: Internal political instability and the inability to resist the growing power of Rome led to the end of the Macedonian kingdom.
  

2. The Kingdom of Thrace and Asia Minor (Ruled by Lysimachus)

Lysimachus, another of Alexander’s generals, took control of Thrace and parts of Asia Minor. Although he ruled successfully for several years, his territories were contested by other Diadochi.

• Peak and decline: Lysimachus expanded his kingdom’s power in Thrace and Asia Minor but came into conflict with Seleucus I Nicator, the ruler of the Seleucid Empire. Lysimachus was defeated and killed at the Battle of Corupedion in 281 BC by Seleucus.

• Disappearance: After Lysimachus' death, his kingdom quickly collapsed, with its territories in Asia Minor annexed by the Seleucid Empire, while Thrace was later absorbed by other regional powers.
  

• Reason for disappearance: The death of Lysimachus and ongoing conflicts with other Diadochi led to the disappearance of his kingdom, which lacked a strong successor.
  

3. The Seleucid Empire (Founded by Seleucus I Nicator)

Seleucus I Nicator founded the Seleucid Empire, which controlled the eastern territories of Alexander's former empire, including Syria, Mesopotamia, Persia, and parts of Asia Minor.

• Peak and decline: The Seleucid Empire reached its peak under the rule of Seleucus and his son Antiochus I. Despite territorial expansion, the empire was marked by internal and external conflicts. One of the greatest crises occurred during the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who attempted to forcibly Hellenize Judea, triggering the Maccabean Revolt (167–160 BC).

• Disappearance: The Seleucid Empire was gradually weakened by territorial losses and internal conflicts, and in 63 BC, the Roman general Pompey turned Syria into a Roman province, marking the end of the Seleucid Empire.

• Reason for disappearance: The Seleucid Empire suffered from internal rivalries, wars with other Hellenistic kingdoms, and Roman expansion, which led to its conquest and dissolution.

4. The Ptolemaic Kingdom (Founded by Ptolemy I Soter)

Ptolemy I Soter, one of Alexander's most influential generals, took control of Egypt and founded the Ptolemaic dynasty. Alexandria, founded by Alexander, became an important cultural and commercial center under the Ptolemies.

• Peak and decline: Under the Ptolemaic dynasty, Egypt prospered for nearly 300 years, becoming a center of Hellenistic culture. The last notable ruler of the kingdom was Cleopatra VII, who attempted to maintain Egypt's independence through alliances with Julius Caesar and later Mark Antony.

• Disappearance: After the defeat of Mark Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, Egypt was annexed by Rome in 30 BC and became a Roman province.

• Reason for disappearance: The Ptolemaic Kingdom was destabilized by internal conflicts and external pressures, and its annexation by Rome marked the end of Hellenistic rule in Egypt.

Correlation with modern countries

1. The Kingdom of Macedonia (ruled by Cassander)

• In antiquity, the Kingdom of Macedonia covered the northern part of modern Greece and extended into the Balkans.
• Modern countries: Greece, North Macedonia, and parts of Albania and Bulgaria.

2. The Kingdom of Thrace and Asia Minor (ruled by Lysimachus)

• This kingdom covered Thrace (northeastern Balkans) and Asia Minor (the territory of present-day Turkey).
  
• Modern countries: Bulgaria, parts of Greece (northern Greece), European Turkey (the area near Istanbul), and Asian Turkey (Anatolia).

3. The Seleucid Empire (founded by Seleucus I Nicator)

• The Seleucid Empire stretched from Syria and Mesopotamia to Persia and parts of Central Asia.
• Modern countries: Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, southeastern Turkey, Afghanistan, parts of Pakistan, and Turkmenistan.

4. The Ptolemaic Kingdom (founded by Ptolemy I Soter)

• The Ptolemaic Kingdom included Egypt and other parts of North Africa.
• Modern countries: Egypt, Libya, and parts of Sudan.

This division reflects how the territories controlled by these Hellenistic kingdoms overlap with modern borders, providing a clear picture of the vastness of these ancient empires in today's world.

• After that, I looked in my night visions, and behold, there was a fourth beast, exceedingly dreadful and powerful; it had large iron teeth, it devoured, broke in pieces, and trampled what was left with its feet; it was different from all the beasts before it, and it had ten horns.

The Fourth Beast in Daniel’s Vision

The fourth beast described in Daniel’s vision is, as previously mentioned, a symbolic representation of the Roman Empire—an empire known for its brutality, military strength, and ability to dominate a vast territory for a long period of time. Let’s analyze each aspect of the text and see how it is reflected in the history and structure of this empire:

1. Exceedingly great, dreadful, and powerful

This description reflects the fierce nature of the Roman Empire, known for its massive conquests and relentless approach to governing and dominating subjugated territories. Rome was an expansionist empire that conquered territories across Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa through brute force and highly organized military strategy.

2. Large iron teeth

The "iron teeth" symbolize Rome’s military strength, particularly highlighting the efficiency and discipline of the Roman legions. The Roman army was one of the most well-organized in the world, renowned for its strict discipline and ability to face much larger armies. Iron, a symbol of toughness, represents Rome’s military dominance, which extended beyond mere conquest to the complete destruction of any resistance.

3. It devoured, broke in pieces, and trampled underfoot

This phrase emphasizes the ruthless manner in which Rome expanded its power. Beyond conquest, Rome had a tendency to completely destroy any enemies who opposed it. A famous example is the destruction of Carthage in 146 BC, after the Romans decisively defeated it in the Punic Wars. After their final victory, the Romans completely razed the city, ensuring that it would never rise again.

4. Different from all the beasts before it

Rome was distinct from previous empires (Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece) due to its political and legal stability and organization. The Roman legal system had a major influence on modern law, and the empire’s administrative structure allowed it to govern conquered territories efficiently. Additionally, the Roman Empire’s long duration made it unique in history.

5. The historical context of the Roman Empire

The Roman Empire was officially established in 27 BC when Augustus became the first emperor. From then on, Rome dominated the Mediterranean and Western Europe for centuries. Its famous wars, such as those against the Carthaginians and the British conquests, significantly expanded Rome’s influence. However, the Roman Empire gradually declined due to internal problems such as corruption, political conflicts, provincial uprisings, and external pressures, particularly the invasions of barbarian tribes.

6. The fall of the Roman Empire

The Roman Empire began to weaken significantly in the 3rd century AD due to repeated invasions, economic crises, and power struggles between different emperors. Eventually, Emperor Theodosius I divided the empire into two parts in 395 AD: the Western Roman Empire and the Eastern Roman (or Byzantine) Empire. While the eastern part survived until 1453, the Western Roman Empire fell in 476 AD when the last emperor, Romulus Augustulus, was deposed by Odoacer, a barbarian leader.

The Origin and Migrations of the Visigoths and Ostrogoths

The Northern Origin of the Goths:The Visigoths and Ostrogoths were part of the Gothic tribes, which, according to historical traditions, originated in the northern regions of Europe, particularly in the Scandinavian area (likely southern Sweden). In the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD, these tribes began migrating from northern Europe towards the southern and eastern regions of the continent. During these migrations, they crossed the Danube and Dniester rivers and came into contact with the Roman Empire.

The Division of the Goths: The Gothic tribes split into two main branches:

• Visigoths (Western Goths): After migrating from the north, the Visigoths initially settled north of the Danube, in regions that today include Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria. They played a significant role in conflicts with the Roman Empire and contributed to its decline.

• Ostrogoths (Eastern Goths): They settled further east, in the regions around the Black Sea, occupying parts of Ukraine and northeastern Romania. After a period of subjugation under the Huns, the Ostrogoths re-emerged as a political and military power and played a key role in the conquest of Italy.

Temporary Settlements in Other Territories

The Visigoths and Ostrogoths used various transit or temporary settlement areas before migrating further south and west into the Roman Empire.

• Visigoths: After crossing the Danube, they occupied parts of Wallachia, Moldova, and other regions both south and north of the river, including Bulgaria. Starting in the 4th century, the Visigoths entered the Roman Empire, where, under the leadership of Alaric, they sacked Rome in 410 AD and eventually established a kingdom in southern France and Spain.

• Ostrogoths: They had a presence in the northern regions of the Black Sea, including Ukraine and northeastern Romania. After a period of subjugation under the Huns, the Ostrogoths reorganized, and under the leadership of Theodoric the Great, they invaded Italy in the 5th century, where they founded a powerful kingdom.

1. The Context Before the Fall of the Roman Empire

The interpretation of the ten horns of the Roman Empire, as described in Daniel 7's prophecy, is closely linked to the idea of the empire’s fragmentation after its fall. The horns symbolize emerging powers or kingdoms that arose following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. However, it is important to note that these kingdoms and territories existed in a nascent form within the administrative structure of the empire before its downfall.

During the Western Roman Empire, many of the regions that later became centers of independent power already existed as important provinces or regions. These included Italy, Gaul, Britain, Hispania, and other territories that were part of the Roman administrative system. Although they were integrated into a unified empire, each of these regions had a degree of local autonomy, and the Roman administration relied on a decentralized system with local governors.

2. Identifying the Ten Territories

The Western Roman Empire gradually fragmented under the pressure of Germanic invasions and other internal factors, and these territories became independent kingdoms or zones controlled by emerging powers. Below is a list of the ten territories associated with the prophetic horns from Daniel:

• Italy
  The center of the Roman Empire and Rome itself. After Rome’s fall, this region was controlled by the Ostrogoths and later by the Lombards.
  Modern country: Italy

• Gaul
  Known today as France, this region was conquered by the Franks under the leadership of Clovis, who founded the Frankish Kingdom.
  Modern countries: France, Belgium

• Britain
  The British Isles, abandoned by Roman legions in the 5th century, were later conquered by the Anglo-Saxons.
  Modern country: United Kingdom

• Hispania
  The Iberian Peninsula, which was taken over by the Visigoths after Rome’s fall.
  Modern countries: Spain, Portugal

• North Africa
  The Roman province of Africa, including Carthage, was conquered by the Vandals, who established the Vandal Kingdom.
  Modern countries: Tunisia, Algeria, Libya

• Roman Germany
  The western part of present-day Germany, conquered by the Franks, Alemanni, and other Germanic groups.
  Modern countries: Germany, partially France and Belgium

• Raetia and Noricum
  Alpine regions that today include parts of Switzerland, Austria, and southern Germany. After Rome’s fall, Germanic and Slavic tribes took control of these regions.
  Modern countries: Switzerland, Austria, Germany

• Pannonia
  A region that included Hungary and parts of the Balkans. The Ostrogoths and Huns dominated this area after Rome’s collapse.
  Modern countries: Hungary, Serbia, Croatia

• Dalmatia
  A region in the western Balkans, controlled by various tribes, including the Ostrogoths and Slavs.
  Modern countries: Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia

• Sicily and Sardinia
  Mediterranean islands initially conquered by the Vandals and later controlled by the Ostrogoths and Byzantines.
  Modern country: Italy (Sicily and Sardinia)

The main differences between the Greek and Roman divisions

1. The Greek Empire was divided internally among Alexander’s generals, who were already part of its structure and ruled regions within the empire. In this case, there were no external forces that invaded and conquered the empire.
2. The Western Roman Empire, on the other hand, was dismantled through external invasions. Tribes such as the Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, Franks, Anglo-Saxons, and others came from outside the empire’s borders and gradually conquered various regions of it. This was not an internal division but a conquest by forces that were not part of the Roman political or military structure.

The list of the ten horns/tribes and their areas of origin

Visigoths (Gothic tribe)

• Area of origin:Primarily from Eastern Europe, between the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea (in present-day Ukraine, Romania, and Poland).
• Conquered regions:They migrated to southwestern Europe, settling in Hispania (modern Spain and Portugal) and southern Gaul (southern modern France). In 410 AD, they sacked Rome.

Ostrogoths (Gothic tribe)

• Area of origin:Similar to the Visigoths, they came from Eastern Europe, from the region north of the Black Sea, in what is now parts of Ukraine and Romania.
• Conquered regions:After successive invasions, they settled in Italy, where they founded the Ostrogothic Kingdom. They conquered Italy between 488 and 493 AD under the leadership of Theodoric.

Franks (Germanic tribe)

• Area of origin:From the region west of the Rhine, in what is now Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands.
• Conquered regions:After the fall of Rome, the Franks, under the leadership of Clovis, conquered Gaul, which largely corresponds to modern France. The Frankish Kingdom became one of the most powerful post-Roman kingdoms.

Vandals (Germanic tribe)

• Area of origin:Originally from northern Germany and modern Poland.
• Conquered regions:After migrating through Gaul and Hispania, they settled in North Africa, in what is now Tunisia, Libya, and Algeria. There, they founded the Vandal Kingdom and sacked Rome in 455 AD.

Burgundians (Germanic tribe)

• Area of origin:They came from a region that is now part of Poland and Germany.
• Conquered regions:They settled in southeastern Gaul (in present-day France, in the region now known as Burgundy) and founded the Burgundian Kingdom.

Suebi (Germanic tribe)

• Area of origin:From present-day Germany and the Czech Republic.
• Conquered regions:After invading Hispania, they established a kingdom in northwestern Hispania (in present-day Spain and Portugal).

Anglo-Saxons (Germanic tribes)

• Area of origin:From northern Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands.
• Conquered regions:After the Roman legions withdrew from Britain, the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes migrated to the British Isles and founded several kingdoms that eventually became England.

Lombards (Germanic tribe)

• Area of origin:From northern Germany (the lower Elbe region, in present-day Germany).
• Conquered regions:In the 6th century, they conquered northern Italy, where they established the Lombard Kingdom.

Alemanni (Germanic tribe)

• Area of origin:From southwestern Germany and parts of Switzerland.
• Conquered regions:They occupied areas of Germany, Alsace, and modern Switzerland, but they did not form a lasting kingdom, as they were later absorbed into the Frankish Kingdom.

Heruli (Germanic tribe)

• Area of origin:From the northern regions of Germany and Scandinavia (approximately modern Denmark).
• Conquered regions:After the fall of Rome, they took control of Italy for a short period but were eventually absorbed by the Ostrogoths.

Prophetically, the ten horns appear after the fourth beast (the Roman Empire), suggesting a period of fragmentation and division of central power. While these territories existed within the empire, they did not have political or military independence. The horns became visible as independent powers only after the collapse of Roman central authority.

The "Little Horn" of Daniel 7

• I was considering the horns, and behold, another little horn came up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words.
  …
• I watched then because of the sound of the pompous words which the horn was speaking; I watched till the beast was slain, and its body destroyed and given to the burning flame.
  
• As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.
  …
  
• Then I wished to know the truth about the fourth beast, which was different from all the others, exceedingly dreadful, with its teeth of iron and nails of bronze, which devoured, broke in pieces, and trampled the residue with its feet;
  
• and the ten horns that were on its head, and the other horn which came up, before which three fell—namely, that horn which had eyes and a mouth which spoke pompous words, whose appearance was greater than his fellows.
  …
  
• Thus he said: "The fourth beast shall be a fourth kingdom on earth, which shall be different from all other kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, trample it, and break it in pieces.
  
• The ten horns are ten kings who shall arise from this kingdom. And another shall rise after them; he shall be different from the first ones, and shall subdue three kings.
  
• He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, shall persecute the saints of the Most High, and shall intend to change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his hand for a time and times and half a time."

The interpretation related to the "little horn" of Daniel 7:8, which plucked out three of the ten horns, is complex and has generated numerous theories throughout history, most of them related to the Church of Rome and the rise of the papacy as a significant religious and political power. This occurred in the context of the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the emergence of barbarian kingdoms which took control over different parts of the empire. Let's analyze how this interpretation matches with the tribes and kingdoms that followed the disintegration of Rome and how the "little horn" managed to gain power.

The little horn that arises and plucks out three of the ten horns is interpreted by many biblical commentators as a power that emerged after the fall of the Roman Empire and gradually took control over other powers. In the classical interpretation, the little horn is associated with the Church of Rome, especially the papacy, which became a central political force in medieval Europe.

The three horns plucked out:

1. Heruli: After Odoacer, leader of the Heruli, deposed the last Western Roman emperor in 476 AD, the Heruli controlled Italy. However, Odoacer was defeated and killed by the Ostrogoths in 493 AD under Theodoric the Great.
2. Ostrogoths: After conquering Italy, the Ostrogoths dominated the region until the 550s when they were defeated by Byzantine armies under the leadership of General Belisarius, during the campaigns of Emperor Justinian I. This defeat removed the Ostrogoths as a political power in Italy.
3. Vandals: The Vandals played an essential role in Rome's collapse through their raids and established a kingdom in North Africa. However, in 533 AD, the Vandals were defeated by the Byzantine Empire, again under General Belisarius, who restored Roman control over North Africa.

These three kingdoms—the Heruli, Ostrogoths, and Vandals—were eliminated or defeated by Byzantine forces or the growing influence of the Church of Rome. Their removal opened the way for papal authority to consolidate its power in Europe.

Let's establish exactly how things evolved according to classical interpretations of Daniel 7’s prophecy and the historical realities of that period.

In 538 AD, after the final defeat of the Ostrogoths in the battle for Rome, the Pope began exercising increasing spiritual and political influence over Europe. This marks the point when the papacy began to take authority over Europe, especially after eliminating the three rival kingdoms: the Visigoths, Ostrogoths, and Vandals.

The 7 horns remaining after the year 538 AD

After the elimination of the three tribes mentioned above, there remained seven kingdoms or horns that submitted to the Papacy. These kingdoms continued to exist and formed the basis of political and religious power in Europe, under the growing influence of the Pope. Here is a list of the seven remaining kingdoms and the territories they controlled in the year 538 AD:

1. Franks
   Territory: Gaul (modern France)
   Status: The Franks were the most powerful Germanic kingdom and became the Papacy’s primary ally. In the year 800 AD, the Pope crowned Charlemagne as Roman Emperor, marking the beginning of the Holy Roman Empire.

2. Burgundians
   Territory: The region of Burgundy, in southeastern Gaul (modern France), and parts of Switzerland and northern Italy.
   Status: The Burgundians fell under Frankish influence and aligned themselves with the Papacy, becoming part of the political structure of medieval Europe.

3. Lombards
   Territory: Northern Italy and parts of Austria.
   Status: The Lombards controlled northern Italy for an extended period but always had a complex relationship with the Papacy. Eventually, the Franks intervened to defeat them in 774 AD and transferred their territories under papal influence.

4. Anglo-Saxons
   Territory: Britain (modern England)
   Status: England was initially pagan but was Christianized starting in 597 AD through missionaries sent by the Pope. The Anglo-Saxons gradually came under papal influence.

5. Suevi
   Territory: Northwestern Hispania (particularly modern Galicia and Portugal).
   Status: The Suevi were, for a time, one of the powers in northern Hispania. Although less influential than the Visigoths, they maintained a subordinate relationship with the Papacy.

6. Alemanni
   Territory: Southwestern Germany and parts of Switzerland.
   Status: The Alemanni were absorbed into the Frankish Kingdom and indirectly came under papal control through Frankish submission.

7. Bavarians
   Territory: Bavaria (southeastern Germany) and parts of Austria.
   Status: The Bavarians were another Germanic tribe subordinated to the Franks and, by implication, to the Papacy.

The Papacy and the subordinate kingdoms (538 AD - 1798 AD)

After the elimination of the three tribes (Visigoths, Ostrogoths, and Vandals), the Papacy began extending its authority over Europe, and the remaining seven kingdoms came under the spiritual and political influence or control of the Pope.

• The Franks were the most powerful and became protectors of the Papacy, beginning with Charlemagne. Under their auspices, the Papacy continued to play a significant role in Europe.
• Other kingdoms, such as the Lombards and Burgundians, were gradually absorbed or brought under the broader control of the Franks or the Holy Roman Empire, while maintaining close ties with the Papacy.

What did the Pope do between 457-538 AD, during the conquests and sackings of Rome?

In this turbulent period, Rome was sacked and occupied multiple times, and the Pope was forced to handle an extremely difficult situation. Here's what happened:

• The Sack of Rome (410 AD): Rome was sacked by the Visigoths under Alaric I. Pope Innocent I was in Rome at this time and, although he lacked military power to prevent the sack, the Church remained important, especially in recovery efforts after the attack.
• Ostrogothic conquest of Rome: After the Visigoths continued their migration toward Hispania, the Ostrogoths under Theodoric the Great took control of Italy in 493 AD. During this time, the Papacy remained in Rome, although papal influence was limited by the Ostrogoths. Pope Symmachus (498-514 AD) and other popes of this period had difficult relations with Ostrogothic rulers but did not flee.
• The Sack of Rome (455 AD): Rome was sacked by the Vandals during Pope Leo I, but the Pope remained in the city and even negotiated with the Vandal leader Genseric, preventing total destruction of the city. This period of successive attacks weakened Rome’s political authority, but the Papacy maintained its spiritual role.

In conclusion, although Rome was occupied and sacked multiple times, the Pope did not permanently flee the city. The Papacy remained in Rome and survived this period, even though it had limited political influence during the Ostrogothic occupations.

Papal authority in the West versus the East:

The authority of the Pope was limited only to the West. The Byzantine Empire (East) did not recognize the Pope’s supreme authority, and the Eastern (Orthodox) Church had its own Patriarch in Constantinople. Thus, the Pope’s power in the East was extremely limited, and the conflict between West and East culminated in the Great Schism of 1054 AD, officially separating the Catholic Church (West) from the Orthodox Church (East).

Areas of Influence:

• Until 1798, the Pope had spiritual and political authority primarily in Western Europe, including territories in Italy, France, Spain, Germany, and parts of England.
• Today, the Papacy’s influence is diminished but still significant, especially in Italy, Spain, Poland, and regions of Latin America (such as Brazil, Argentina, Mexico), where the Catholic Church remains dominant.

What happened in 1798?

In the year 1798, the Papacy suffered a major blow when Napoleon Bonaparte, through his general Louis-Alexandre Berthier, entered Rome and took Pope Pius VI prisoner. This event is considered the end of the Papacy's period of absolute domination over Europe, after a reign of over 1260 years (beginning in the year 538 AD).

This event marked the temporary, though not definitive, end of the Papacy’s direct political influence over European states. Its religious influence continued even under these extremely difficult circumstances.

Why is the Papacy considered this "little horn"?

Here are the identifying elements of the "little horn" from Daniel 7’s prophecy, traditionally interpreted as referring to the Papacy and its influence in medieval Europe:

1. Period of domination – a time, times, and half a time (1260 years):

• This symbolic period of 1260 years is considered the period of absolute political power of the Papacy, from 538 AD (after the defeat of the Ostrogoths) until 1798 AD (when Pope Pius VI was captured by Napoleon’s forces).
• During this period, the Papacy held a central role in European politics, especially through its influence over kings and emperors. Its authority was not merely religious but also political, strongly shaping medieval society.

2. Eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth speaking pompous words:

• The eyes of a man traditionally symbolize human wisdom or knowledge, suggesting a sophisticated power capable of administration and influence. The Papacy, during its period of power, was regarded as a sophisticated institution, with a vast administrative network and extensive theological knowledge.
• The mouth speaking pompous words refers to the grandiose claims made by the Papacy regarding supreme authority. Throughout history, popes claimed to be Christ’s vicars on earth, asserting supreme spiritual authority over all kings and leaders, which was perceived as arrogance or pride in relation to other powers and religions.

3. The pompous words and the authority of the Papacy:

• As mentioned, Daniel was impressed by the pompous words of the little horn. This suggests that the horn stood out not only through political actions but also through ambitious speeches and grandiose claims.
• The Papacy had tremendous influence in defining doctrines and religious laws, asserting supremacy over Western European kings and emperors. This spiritual authority over political leaders was a unique feature that other kingdoms did not possess. The Pope was not only a religious leader but also a political leader who could excommunicate and discipline kings.

4. Appearance greater than the other horns:

• Here we see another important element: the little horn had an appearance greater than the other horns, symbolizing the superior authority it gained.
• The Papacy exerted significant influence over Europe, overshadowing the authority of individual kingdoms. Although it did not have its own traditional army, its spiritual power was so strong that the popes could control kingdoms and often dictate their internal policies.

5. Speaking blasphemies against the Most High:

• The blasphemies against God have traditionally been interpreted as referring to the religious claims of the Papacy. These claims included asserting that the Pope is Christ’s representative on earth and holds supreme authority over the Church and the salvation of souls.
• Also, in this context, blasphemy can be seen as referring to changes in religious teachings or superhuman claims associated with the Papacy.

6. Changing times and laws:

• As mentioned, this little horn intended to "change times and laws." According to traditional interpretation, this refers to religious changes made by the Papacy, such as changing the day of worship from the Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday, and doctrinal changes regarding other religious practices.
• The Papacy also influenced secular laws, directly impacting legal codes and governance structures in Europe.

7. Persecution of the saints and prevailing against them:

• Another important element is the persecution of the saints. The prophecy mentions that the little horn would wage war against the saints and prevail against them.
• Historically, the Papacy was involved in religious persecutions such as the Inquisition, in which thousands of people were accused of heresy and punished or even executed for opposing the Church’s doctrines and authority. This is interpreted as fulfilling this prophecy.

8. A time, times, and half a time (1260 years):

• 1260 years is the period attributed to Papal domination. This period begins, according to classical interpretations, in 538 AD, when the Ostrogoths were eliminated, clearing the path for the Papacy, and ends in 1798 AD, when Pope Pius VI was captured by General Berthier, under Napoleon’s orders. This event was considered a symbolic end of the Papacy’s dominant political power in Europe.

9. Final judgment and destruction of the little horn:

• The prophecy says that a time will come when God will bring justice and remove the dominion of this little horn, and the Kingdom of God will be established. This is a reference to a final judgment and the definitive destruction of this system of power.

The Papacy officially considers itself the "Head of Christ's Church"

The Papacy regards itself as the "Head of Christ's Church," based on the concept that the Pope is the successor of Saint Peter, who, according to Catholic tradition, was the first bishop of Rome. This doctrine is central to the Roman Catholic Church, and the Pope is recognized as Vicarius Christi(Vicar of Christ), meaning Christ’s representative on Earth.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states this: the Pope, as bishop of Rome, has supreme authority in Christ’s Church and is considered the universal shepherd of the entire Church. This doctrine was reinforced at the First Vatican Council (1869-1870), which proclaimed the dogma of papal infallibility, meaning that when the Pope speaks “ex cathedra” on matters of faith and morals, he is considered infallible.

This claim of spiritual supremacy is one of the characteristics reflected in Daniel 7, in the description of the little horn, which speaks "pompous words" and claims a unique spiritual authority.

The Papacy considers itself heir to the authority of the Western Empire

Throughout history, the Papacy has presented itself as the symbolic heir of the Western Roman Empire. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD, the Papacy became one of the institutions that filled the resulting power vacuum, and during the Middle Ages, the Pope was considered a central authority, both religious and political.

• A significant moment in this inheritance occurred in 800 AD, when Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne as Roman Emperor (initiating the Holy Roman Empire), thus symbolically restoring a Western Roman Empire under the auspices of the Church.

• Moreover, the title "Pontifex Maximus," previously held by Roman emperors, was adopted by the Pope. This title reflects continuity and the Pope’s claim to be the supreme spiritual leader of the Christian world, similar to how Roman emperors held supreme authority over the Empire.

Throughout the Middle Ages, the Papacy continued to play a central role in European politics, concluding treaties, organizing crusades, and wielding significant influence over royal succession and European conflicts.

The use of Latin—its relevance for identification with the little horn

Yes, the use of Latin by the Roman Catholic Church up to this day is significant in several respects:

• Latin was the official language of the Roman Empire and, after the fall of the empire, it remained the language of the Church and Western Christian theology. The Papacy preserved Latin as its liturgical and official language, symbolizing continuity with the Roman heritage.
• The use of Latin also symbolizes papal authoritarianism. While other national languages began to be used in local churches, Latin remained the official language of Catholic rites, being employed in liturgies, official documents, and other important ceremonies.
• Additionally, Latin serves as a symbol of the unity of the Catholic Church worldwide, as well as a reminder of the Papacy's claim of succession from the Western Roman Empire.

In the context of identification with the little horn, the continuous use of Latin reflects the historical persistence and authority of the Papacy, which, through its traditions and hierarchical system, connects directly back to the Roman Empire.

Eastern Christianity and its relationship with the little horn:

The Eastern (Byzantine) Empire had a very different development compared to the West. Eastern Christianity, organized around the Orthodox Church and the Patriarchate of Constantinople, never recognized the supremacy of the Pope and was in constant conflict with the Papacy.

• In 1054 AD, the Great Schism occurred, officially separating the Western Church (Catholic) from the Eastern Church (Orthodox). This had a significant impact on both sides, leading to two very distinct Christian traditions.
• The Orthodox Church never had a single leader with absolute authority, like the Pope. Instead, the Orthodox Church was led by regional Patriarchs and never claimed political authority comparable to that of the Papacy. In the East, the Byzantine Emperor played an important religious role (symbolized by the concept of "Caesaropapism"—the emperor held both secular and religious power).

Is there a connection between the little horn and the East?

• The Papacy (the little horn) had no authority in the East because the Eastern Church and the Byzantine Empire did not recognize papal supremacy. The Pope’s authority was limited to the Western Empire, and events in the East unfolded very differently.
• If we look at the Byzantine Empire and Eastern Christianity, the description of the little horn from Daniel 7 does not appear to apply here, because the Orthodox Church never had a centralized figure with such political and spiritual authority, and the East did not experience the same political-religious dynamic as the West.

The little horn and the coming of the Son of Man

The new information Daniel receives, compared to the vision in Daniel 2, relates to the little horn and the coming of the Son of Man, who approaches the Ancient of Days. This introduces an essential concept in biblical prophecy: judgment and the establishment of the Kingdom of God.

• "I watched till thrones were put in place, And the Ancient of Days was seated; His garment was white as snow, And the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne was a fiery flame, Its wheels a burning fire;
• A fiery stream issued And came forth from before Him. A thousand thousands ministered to Him; Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him. The court was seated, And the books were opened."

…

• "I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven!
  He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him.
• Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed."

…

• "But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever."

…

• "I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them,
• until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom."

…

• "But the court shall be seated, And they shall take away his dominion, To consume and destroy it forever.
• Then the kingdom and dominion, And the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, Shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, And all dominions shall serve and obey Him."

The Little Horn – a new revelation

• The little horn is a new element in Daniel’s prophecy, which was not mentioned in Daniel 2. There, the empires were presented in a simplified form, through the image of a great statue made of metal, and the emphasis was placed on the succession of empires. However, in Daniel 7, Daniel receives more details about the fourth empire, especially about its final phase, which involves not only a political power, but also a religious-political power—the little horn.
• The little horn has a clearly defined period of domination: 1260 prophetic days (actual years), symbolizing a long period in which this hybrid system (religious and political) would exercise its authority.
• The little horn has a unique character, described as having eyes like the eyes of a man and speaking pompous words, and this made a profound impression on Daniel, as it indicated an arrogant power that rises up not only against peoples but also against God.

The coming of the Son of Man – a new discovery for Daniel

• Indeed, what is completely new to Daniel in this vision is the description of the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds of heaven, who advances towards the Ancient of Days (God) and receives dominion, glory, and a kingdom.
• In Daniel 2, the focus was on God’s Kingdom, which would destroy all other kingdoms and endure forever. However, the detail about the Son of Man who receives dominion and is brought before God had not been previously mentioned. This is a new and essential element.

The parallel between Daniel 7 and Daniel 2 – God’s Kingdom

• There is a clear parallel between the two chapters, especially when describing the Kingdom of God. In Daniel 2, the stone "struck the image" and became a mountain that filled the entire earth. This stone symbolizes God’s Kingdom, which will replace all other empires.
• In Daniel 7, we see the same message, but with more detail. After the little horn and the other kingdoms are judged and destroyed, the Kingdom of God is given to the holy people. It is clear that God’s judgment brings an end to human domination and inaugurates the eternal reign of Christ.
• In both cases, the emphasis is placed on the fact that God’s reign is eternal and will never be replaced by another kingdom or power.

Judgment and the end of the little horn

• Another new aspect for Daniel is the concept of judgment that comes after the period of domination by the little horn. After the little horn exercises its power for 1260 years, the prophecy says that judgment will follow. This judgment is described as divine, conducted by the Ancient of Days, and the dominion of the little horn will be overthrown and destroyed forever.
• This judgment brings justice for the saints of the Most High, who were persecuted and oppressed by the little horn. It marks the beginning of the everlasting reign of God, in which the saints receive the Kingdom.

The unique aspects of chapter 7

• Thus, besides the details about the little horn and its period of domination, Daniel receives an essential new vision concerning the Son of Man and the final judgment. These aspects had not been mentioned in the vision from Daniel 2, and they represent a progressive revelation of God’s plan, in which Christ is the One who will receive dominion over all peoples and nations.
• In Daniel 7:13-14, the Son of Man is seen coming with the clouds of heaven, indicating divine authority and majesty. This is consistent with Christ’s coming mentioned in the New Testament, where He will return to establish His Kingdom.

An Important Observation:

Daniel does not directly ask questions about the "Son of Man" from his vision in Daniel 7, even though this aspect seems new and rather impressive. Why? Let's try to better understand this situation by analyzing what Daniel might have known from the Old Testament regarding the concepts of the Son of Man and judgment, and how he might have perceived this scene.

Let's focus on what Daniel could have already known from the Scriptures available in his period, around 552 B.C., when the vision in Daniel 7 took place. We'll consider which texts or traditions would have been available and relevant to Daniel at that time:

1. Torah (The five books of Moses)

In Daniel's time, the Torah (the five books of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) was already established and considered sacred. These were essential texts for Jewish religion and provided the foundations of Daniel's faith. From the Torah, he could have understood the following about the Messiah and God’s future plans for Israel:

• Genesis 3:15– As mentioned earlier, this is the first prophecy about a Deliverer who would crush the serpent’s head, suggesting someone who would conquer evil. Daniel would have been familiar with this initial promise about the Deliverer (Messiah).

• Genesis 49:10– The prophecy regarding Judah's dynasty would have been very important for Daniel’s understanding. He would have known that a ruler would come from the tribe of Judah and bring dominion over the nations.

• Deuteronomy 18:15– Moses’ prophecy about a Prophet like himself, who would rise up among the people and receive divine authority. This text would have been highly relevant for Daniel, being one of the few texts directly suggesting the coming of a spiritual leader.

2. Oral tradition and known prophetic writings

In Daniel's time, the writings of the prophets had not yet been completely canonized, but certain prophecies were known and circulated through oral tradition or were already written, though not yet standardized as part of the canon. It is very likely Daniel was familiar with some of these prophecies.

• The tradition about David and the promise made to David’s house from 2 Samuel 7:12-16was well known. The Davidic covenant promised a king from David’s dynasty who would reign forever. This promise was central to Jewish messianic expectations and would have been known to Daniel.

• Prophecies about Israel’s restoration after exile would have circulated among the Jewish people, as they eagerly awaited God’s deliverance from captivity and the restoration of Jerusalem and the kingdom. Daniel, as an important servant in the Babylonian royal court, would have been aware of these expectations.

3. The Book of Jeremiah:

During Daniel’s lifetime, it is likely that the writings of the prophet Jeremiah were known. Jeremiah was contemporary with Daniel, and his prophecies had a direct impact on how Daniel understood the Babylonian exile and expectations about Israel’s future.

• Jeremiah 23:5-6 is a very important text for messianic expectations:
  "Behold, the days are coming," says the LORD, "That I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness; A King shall reign and prosper, And execute judgment and righteousness in the earth. In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell safely; Now this is His name by which He will be called: THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS."
• This text clearly refers to a Messiah from David’s lineage who would bring righteousness and salvation to Israel. Daniel would have known Jeremiah’s prophecies, since in Daniel 9 there is explicit reference to Jeremiah’s prophecies concerning the length of the Babylonian exile.

4. Hopes regarding the Messiah and Israel’s liberation:

During Daniel's time, messianic and eschatological (end-times) expectations already existed among the Jewish people. Many of these expectations revolved around the idea of restoring Israel’s kingdom and the coming of an anointed ruler who would restore the Davidic dynasty and bring righteousness and peace.

• In exile, the Jews had no king of their own and lived under foreign domination. Thus, the expectation of a Messiah who would free the people and reestablish Davidic rule was likely a very prominent theme during this period, even if not all the prophecies had yet been written.

5. Daniel’s understanding of the Son of Man and Messiah

Although Daniel did not have access to all the texts we now possess in the Old Testament, he would have been familiar with messianic concepts from the Torah, traditions about David, and likely from Jeremiah’s prophecies. Additionally, Daniel would have understood that God would send a deliverer for the people of Israel.

The Son of Man

Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of Man numerous times in the New Testament, and this is not accidental. Specifically, His reference to the Son of Man is closely related to the vision from Daniel 7, where the Son of Man receives universal dominion following a divine judgment in heaven. By using this title, Jesus not only identifies Himself with this prophetic figure but also subtly indicates the nature of His mission—one involving both suffering and redemption on earth, as well as glory and dominion in heaven after the fulfillment of divine judgment.

Jesus as the "Son of Man" in the New Testament

Jesus uses the title Son of Man more than 80 times in the Gospels, and each use carries profound significance related to His mission. This title is clearly inspired by Daniel 7, but it also includes elements of humility and suffering that reflect the concept of a suffering Messiah found in Isaiah 53.

• Mark 14:61-62: During His trial before the High Priest, Jesus is asked if He is the Messiah, and He answers: "I am. And you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven."
• Here, Jesus clearly references Daniel 7, affirming that He is the Son of Man who will come on the clouds of heaven and receive universal dominion after judgment. This indicates that Jesus directly identifies Himself with the Son of Man figure from Daniel's vision.
• Matthew 26:64: Jesus answers before the Sanhedrin: "From now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of God's power and coming on the clouds of heaven."
• Jesus links judgment with His future coming, as prophesied in Daniel 7, implying both His divine authority and His role as judge.

Why does Jesus identify with Daniel's "Son of Man"?

• A suffering and glorified Messiah: In Daniel 7, the Son of Man receives dominion after a heavenly judgment. This corresponds perfectly with the role Jesus plays in His earthly mission. He comes to fulfill redemption and atonement for sins, but glory and universal dominion will only be granted after judgment occurs, following His death, resurrection, and ascension.
• Role as mediator between heaven and earth: By referring to the Son of Man, Jesus indicates that His mission includes both an earthly and a heavenly dimension. He is God incarnate, but also the heavenly King who will receive eternal dominion after judgment.
• The eschatological Messiah: In Daniel's vision, the Son of Man receives dominion after all other powers are judged. Jesus, through His resurrection and ascension into heaven, fulfills this vision. Jesus is the heavenly King, but His glory and complete dominion will be fully realized at the end of times, after the final judgment.

The connection with Judgment and the Kingdom

• Judgment: As you've noted, judgment is a central aspect of Daniel 7's vision, and Jesus often speaks of the final judgment in the New Testament. For example, in Matthew 25:31-32, Jesus says: "When the Son of Man comes in His glory with all His holy angels, He will sit on His throne of glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats."
• Jesus presents Himself as the final judge, exactly as the Son of Man is portrayed in Daniel's vision. This role as judge aligns with the Jewish understanding of the final judgment, but with a new dimension: Jesus is the Son of Man who will lead this judgment.
• Universal dominion: In Daniel 7, the Son of Man receives universal dominion that will never pass away. Jesus refers to this eternal dominion several times in the Gospels, indicating that His Kingdom is not of this world but will be established following judgment.
• John 18:36: "My Kingdom is not of this world; if My Kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My Kingdom is not from here."
• This statement emphasizes that Jesus' dominion will fully manifest after the final events occur, precisely as described in Daniel 7.

The role of the "Son of Man" on earth and in heaven

Jesus adopts the title Son of Man to express two complementary realities:

Suffering and sacrifice:

• On earth, Jesus is the Son of Man who suffers for humanity's sins, being a suffering Servant.
• In Mark 10:45, He says: "For the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many."
• This represents the human and sacrificial aspect of the Son of Man, connected to His mission of redeeming sins. This earthly work precedes the judgment scene of Daniel 7.

Glorification and dominion:

• After His resurrection and ascension, Jesus receives glory and universal authority in heaven, exactly as the Son of Man from Daniel 7 receives dominion following judgment. Jesus knows that this dominion will be fully revealed at the end of the ages, when He returns to judge the world and establish His eternal Kingdom.

The 1798 Revolution – a temporary "end"

The event of 1798, when the Papacy was "overthrown" following the French Revolution, was not the definitive end of the power of this little horn, since the saints did not receive their Kingdom in that year either.

The Revolution is not the final event

In the historicist tradition, the year 1798 is seen as the end of the 1260-year period of papal domination (538 AD – 1798 AD), when General Berthier captured Pope Pius VI and ended the political power of the Papacy. However, this was not the "final end" of the little horn’s power. 1798 represented rather a temporary ending, an interruption of the Papacy’s political and religious power, but not the final event, because according to the book of Daniel, the prophetic "end" of the little horn is directly tied to the final judgment and the moment when the saints receive possession of the kingdom.

In the next chapter, Daniel 8, we find the prophetic revelation of history beyond the year 1798.