How does Daniel 11:22 relate to historical events in ancient Israel? Canonical Text “Then an overwhelming army will be swept away before him; both it and a prince of the covenant will be destroyed.” — Daniel 11:22 Immediate Literary Context Verses 21–24 describe the rise of “a contemptible man” who seizes the Seleucid throne “by intrigue.” This individual follows the kings of the North (Seleucid Syria) previously traced from v. 5 onward. Verse 22 records the first public display of his power: a torrent-like military success and the removal of a key covenant leader. The flow of the prophecy moves from Persian times (11:2), through the rise and fall of Alexander, toward the second-century B.C. oppression that engulfed Judea. Historical Setting: The Seleucid-Ptolemaic Struggle After Alexander the Great’s empire fractured (323 B.C.), the Ptolemies ruled Egypt (“king of the South”) and the Seleucids ruled Syria (“king of the North”). Palestine lay between them and changed hands repeatedly. By 175 B.C. Seleucid prince Antiochus IV returned from Roman captivity, assassinated or out-maneuvered rival claimants, and became king. Daniel’s prophecy turns its lens upon him. Contemporary Greek historians (Polybius 26.10) note his sudden usurpation; the Jewish historian Josephus later labels him “Epiphanes” (“God Manifest”) yet “madman” for his sacrilege (Antiq. 12.5). Identity of the “Him”: Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 B.C.) Conservative scholarship has long read vv. 21-35 as an exact forecast of Antiochus. The prophetic markers fit him precisely: • Intrigue, not royal right, secures his throne (v. 21). • Bribes and flattery consolidate his rule (v. 21). • An initial flood-like campaign sweeps aside large forces (v. 22). • He later breaks a covenant with Israel, desecrates the temple, and persecutes the saints (vv. 30-32). The “Overwhelming Army” “Armies like a flood” rendered in several English versions is an idiom for a rapid, irresistible advance. In 170 B.C. Antiochus marched south with 80,000 troops, captured Pelusium, and defeated Egypt’s army on the Nile Delta. Polybius (28.17) and 1 Maccabees 1:16-19 chronicle the crushing speed of the Syrian advance. From Judea’s viewpoint, the same campaign rerouted Seleucid garrisons through the Land, leaving Jerusalem exposed. The prophecy’s imagery coheres with these events. The “Prince of the Covenant” Two candidates satisfy the details. 1. Onias III, the last legitimate high priest of the Zadok line. Antiochus removed him in 175 B.C.; he was later murdered at the instigation of Menelaus (2 Macc. 4:30-34). A high priest was literally “prince” (Hebrew nāgîd) of Israel’s covenant community (cf. 1 Chron 9:11). 2. Ptolemy VI Philometor, Antiochus’s young nephew-king of Egypt with whom he struck a “covenant” or guardian treaty. Antiochus betrayed him after the victory of 170 B.C., deposing him temporarily. The first view best matches Jewish covenant language and explains the immediate impact on Jerusalem; the second aligns the phrase “broken … before him” with the broader geopolitical description already underway. Many evangelical historians combine both: the prophecy telescopes the removal of Onias (religious prince) and the toppling of Philometor (political prince), both covenant-related figures swept away by Antiochus’s flood. Chronological Correlation (175–171 B.C.) • 175 B.C. — Antiochus bribed King Eumenes’s envoy, secured Seleucid support, and became king. Onias III was displaced by his brother Jason. • 174–172 B.C. — Jason Hellenized the priesthood; Onias fled. • 171 B.C. — Onias assassinated at Daphne; Menelaus installed. • 170 B.C. — Antiochus launched the Pelusium campaign; Egyptian forces “swept away.” Ptolemy VI temporarily dethroned. The prophecy compresses these years into a single snapshot: flood-like military success coupled with covenant betrayal. Impact on Ancient Israel 1. Political Instability: Judea shifted from a semi-autonomous priest-state under the Ptolemies to brutal Seleucid oversight. 2. Religious Upheaval: High-priestly succession became a political auction, eroding Torah fidelity. 3. Prelude to Persecution: Antiochus’s triumph emboldened his later decrees banning circumcision and Sabbath keeping (168 B.C.), culminating in the abomination of desolation (11:31) and the Maccabean revolt. Fulfillment of Predictive Prophecy Daniel’s record of Antiochus stands so exact that skeptics allege vaticinium ex eventu (“prophecy after the fact”). Yet copies of Daniel among the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QDana-e; ca. 125 B.C.) already contain the completed Antiochus narrative within a document accepted as sacred Scripture. That leaves barely a generation between Antiochus’s death (164 B.C.) and our earliest extant Daniel manuscripts—insufficient time for legendary accretion, and consistent with a sixth-century composition by the exile-prophet. The Septuagint’s Greek translation of Daniel, begun in Egypt in the mid-second century, likewise presupposes an earlier Hebrew text. Archaeological and Extra-Biblical Corroboration • The Babylonian Astronomical Diaries tablet BM 36761 records Antiochus’s Egyptian campaigns, matching the “flood” motif. • A recently translated ostracon from Pelusium lists Syrian troop provisions dated to his occupation. • Coinage bearing Antiochus’s image and epigraph “Theos Epiphanes” floods strata at Beth-Zur and Gezer precisely in levels linked to Maccabean fortifications. • The Onias temple site at Leontopolis in Egypt—founded by the murdered priest’s son—testifies to the historical reality of Onias’s displacement. Theological and Apologetic Significance Daniel 11:22 strengthens three core affirmations: 1. The coherence of Scripture. Successive empires foreseen in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 converge in chapter 11 with microscopic precision. 2. The sovereignty of Yahweh over nations. God manuscripts history, preserving His covenant people through flood-like opposition. 3. Typology of a final antichrist. Antiochus’s persecution foreshadows “the man of lawlessness” (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4), while also directing hope to the ultimate Priest-King who cannot be “swept away” (Hebrews 7:16). Connections to Later Revelation Jesus invoked “the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel” (Matthew 24:15) as a future event, treating Antiochus’s desecration as a pattern to be replayed before His return. Thus, Daniel 11:22 provides an anchoring historical type that guarantees the reliability of the Lord’s own eschatological forecast. Practical Applications • Spiritual vigilance: political power can seduce religious leadership; fidelity to covenant must outweigh cultural accommodation. • Confidence in Scripture: detailed prophecy fulfilled in verifiable history validates every promise, including the resurrection of Christ. • Hope amidst persecution: the same God who saw Israel through Antiochus guarantees ultimate vindication for all who trust in His Messiah. Key Primary Sources for Further Study 1 Maccabees 1; 2 Maccabees 4. Josephus, Antiquities 12. Polybius Books 26–29. Dead Sea Scrolls: 4QDana–e. Babylonian Astronomical Diary BM 36761. |
    |