.
DANIEL 11 AND THE KING OF THE NORTH
The 'king of the north' is soon to fulfill his end time role as confirmed in Daniel 11:45. But do we know who the king of the north is and what he is going to do? This is connected with the close of probation, so it's important to understand.
When Alexander's Grecian empire was divided, the different portions of the kingdom lay 'towards the four winds of heaven.' (Daniel 11:4). That is, north, east,
south and west of Palestine. So when the 'king of the north' or 'king of the south' are mentioned, it is referring to the king that occupies the territory of
Alexander's divided empire to the north and to the south of Palestine.
Now when we study Daniel 11, we can clearly see that there are no prophetic symbols employed in any of the chapter. It doesn't mention any 'horns' or 'beasts' like Daniel 7 and 8. It simply speaks of secular kings and kingdoms all the way through. Therefore we are to take Daniel 11 as a literal history of kings and kingdoms. Elder James White even said himself ... "There is a line of historic prophecy in chapter eleven, where the symbols are thrown off" (James White, Review and Herald, Oct. 3, 1878). This is so important to understand, as you will not be able to come to the truth of Daniel 11 unless you discard any symbolism and take it as literal history.
Now it is the final verses that are important to us today, to show us how close we are to the close of probation mentioned in Daniel 12:1. But we need to lay some groundwork first to show that this chapter is dealing with literal kings and kingdoms of the civil realm. So we will look at a number of verses going through Daniel 11 to show you the literal nature of this chapter.
We will also be placing WAYMARKS throughout this page, giving clear historical points, showing we are on the right track.
Daniel 11:1-2 ...'Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him. And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.'
Angel Gabriel is the one speaking to Daniel and he confirms that this is in the first year of Darius the Mede. Gabriel then goes on to mention that 3 kings will "yet" stand up in Persia. Cyrus was the king of Persia during the reign of Darius the Mede, so Gabriel is speaking of 3 kings that would rise after Cyrus. Those 3 kings were Cambyses, Smerdis and Darius the Persian. The fourth which was to be "far richer" was Xerxes (the Ahasuerus of the book of Esther).
Daniel 11:3-4 ...'And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.'
WAYMARK 1 - The mighty king that stands up is Alexander the Great, who reigns from 336BC. We know this from verse 2, which says that the fourth king of Persia "stirred up the realm of Grecia." Xerxes was the fourth king and it was he who 'stirred up Grecia' by seeking to conquer Greece with a huge army. Thus the mighty king to stand up is Alexander the great, which verse 4 confirms his kingdom would be broken and divided toward the four winds (directions - Jer.49:36; Matt.24:31) of heaven. History confirms that this happened to Alexander the great and Greece. After Alexander died, Greece was divided between his four generals into four areas. Alexander's son(s) and half brother Philip were killed, which is why verse 4 above says his kingdom was not divided to his "posterity" (or family). It was Alexander's four generals who took the four parts of divided Greece. Cassander ruled Macedonia in the West; Lysimachus ruled Thrace and Asia Minor in the North; Seleucus ruled Syrian Empire in the East; and Ptolemy ruled Egypt in the South. This places verses 3-4 between the dates 336BC to 323BC.
Daniel 11:5-6 ...'And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion. And in the end of years they shall join themselves together; for the king's daughter of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement: but she shall not retain the power of the arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm: but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that begat her, and he that strengthened her in these times.'
We are here now told that out of the four divisions of Alexander's kingdom, two of those would be strong - the "king of the south, and one of his princes." The king of the south (Ptolemy I - Egypt) did indeed become strong, by taking over many islands and cities for Egypt. But one of the other four generals was to be even stronger than Ptolemy of Egypt. That was Seleucus I Nicator of the Syrian division, who conquered Lysimachus in the north and many other territories, and thus the Seleucid empire became a vast empire. Seleucus founded the city of Antioch and made it his capital to reign from. Thus Seleucus now becomes the 'king of the north', ruling over the northern division of Alexander's empire. This is why we now see the terms 'king of the south' and 'king of the north.' As these are the two 'kings' who would be 'strong.' The two kings or kingdoms that would rule north and south of Palestine.
This is key to understanding the truth of the WHOLE of Daniel 11. The first divisions of Alexander's empire must determine the kings of the north and south from the standpoint of Palestine, and whoever rules that geographical location at the time of the particular verse given is known as the king of the north or south. Otherwise we are left with no solid application to test the prophecy.
We know that 'one of his princes' in verse 5 is speaking of Seleucus because of what verse 6 goes on to say. In verse 6 we still have the king of the south, but we also now have the king of the north. So this 'prince' in verse 5 becomes the king of the north, and we know this is the Seleucid empire because as verse 6 says, the king of the south and king of the north come together through the daughter of the king of the south.
WAYMARK 2 - Verse 6 says "in the end of years." So this is after the reign of Ptolemy I and Seleucus I. We know from history that this took place through Bernice, the daughter of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (king of the south), who married Antiochus II Theos (king of the north). Through this marriage, the kings of the south and north both agreed to peace between them. This is the 'agreement' made between them as stated in verse 6. But Antiochus II was already married to Laodice, and he puts her aside to marry Bernice. But as verse 6 says, she (Bernice) shall "not retain the power of the arm; neither shall he stand." In revenge, Laodice had Bernice and Antiochus II killed. This places verse 6 around the year 252 BC.
Daniel 11:7 ...'But out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an army, and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall prevail.'
The 'branch of her' is a family member of Bernice. Does history confirm that a family member of Bernice made war with the king of the north (Seluecid empire)? Yes! Ptolemy III Euergetes, the brother of Bernice, became king of Egypt and waged war against Seleucus II (king of the north) and succeeds. The following verses up to verse 15 foretells the following battles that took place between the king of the south and the king of the north.
Can you see the foundation that has been set for this chapter? It is dealing with civil kings and kingdoms, with no symbolic language whatsoever, and the battles between them to gain control. And the kings of the north and south are those kings which control the geographical location north and south of Palestine, based on the original division of Alexander's kingdom. This is important to understand as we proceed through the chapter.
Daniel 11:16-22 ...'But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with him; thus shall he do: and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her: but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him. After this shall he turn his face unto the isles, and shall take many: but a prince for his own behalf shall cause the reproach offered by him to cease; without his own reproach he shall cause it to turn upon him. Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his own land: but he shall stumble and fall, and not be found. Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle. And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries. And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.'
WAYMARK 3 - Verses 16-22 - Just as a new king and power was introduced in verse 3 (Alexander the Great) saying he will "do according to his will," a new power is now introduced in verse 16 above, which is why it says, like it did of Alexander the Great, that he "shall do according to his own will." The new power introduced here is clearly Rome, matching the little horn power of Daniel 8, which arose after the dividing of the Grecian empire. We know this from what is said. It says "none shall stand before him," meaning this is a power that none can stand against and that he would "stand in the glorious land" which "by his hand shall be consumed." That word consumed in the original Hebrew means to destroy utterly and bring to an end. What did Rome do in AD70? They completely destroyed Jerusalem. No other kingdom in Daniel 11 can be said to completely destroy the "glorious land" other than Rome. This was prophesied in Matthew 24:15-16 and Luke 21:20-21.
The Bible itself confirms the meaning of verse 20. Luke 2:1 tells us that Caesar Augustus "taxed the world." Now Daniel 11:20 tells us that this was done "in the glory of the kingdom." This could apply to both facts that this was the time leading up to the peak of the Roman empire and also that Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world had come.
Verse 21 then tells us a "vile person shall stand up." This points clearly to Tiberius whom history records as being a vile, dark person who holds the place of being the most perverted of early Roman emperors. (see here - https://alexandermeddings.com/history/ancient-history/vidi-vici-veni-the-sex-lives-of-the-caesars/). He, as the verse says, was also given no honour. When Tiberius died he was given no divine honour as emperor (see here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius). The people of Rome even cheered when he died (see here - https://www.italyonthisday.com/2023/03/tiberius-roman-emperor.html). Verse 22 tells us that "the prince of the covenant" will also be broken by him. Jesus Christ was crucified under Tiberius. This places verses 16-22 between the dates of 168BC to 70AD.
You will notice that when Rome comes on the scene, the name 'king of the north' disappears. Even though Rome conquered the territory of the king of the north, Rome ruled from the WEST, which is why it never is given that name. But we will see the name come back AFTER Rome.
Daniel 11:30 ...'For the ships of Chittim shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant.'
The 'ships of Chittim' coming against 'him' is a reference to the barbarian tribes coming against Rome in the 4th century, dividing it up and weakening it. Three of those tribes - Huns, Vandals and Visigoths, were arian tribes that rejected the god of Rome. This is the time where church and state were uniting. Constantine was the first to unite church and state and have 'intelligence with them that forsake the covenant', namely the bishops of Rome. Then after the attack from the barbarian tribes which rejected the god of Rome, Emperor Justinian declared that the Catholic Church was to be the head of all churches and correctors of 'heretics.'
Daniel 11:31 ...'And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.'
Now this is where we need to think about what is being said, as many apply a wrong application to this verse and go astray with the rest of the verses. So verse 31 says that "arms shall stand on his part." What arms, and on who's part? The 'his' in verse 31 is referring to the 'him' and 'he' in verse 30. We learned that the 'him' and 'he' in verse 30 is Pagan Rome and its kings (emperors) during that time, with the barbarian tribes attacking 'him.' So verse 31 is saying that arms will stand on the part of Pagan Rome which was now uniting church and state to place that 'abomination' which is PAPAL Rome. Arms is a reference to another civil power giving its support to Rome, which together 'they would take away the daily and place the abomination that makes desolate' (Papal Rome).' History confirms that the conversion of king Clovis of France to Catholicism in 496AD was instrumental in supplying the 'arms' to Rome, subjecting the Arian Goths and placing the Roman Catholic Church as the head of both church and state.
WAYMARK 4 - The taking away of the daily and placing the abomination of desolation is a clear reference to Daniel 8 and the little horn power. Now if you see our study pages on this (2300 DAY PROPHECY and WHY ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES CANNOT BE THE LITTLE HORN) you will see that the taking away of the 'daily' and the placing of the 'abomination of desolation' is the taking away of PAGAN Rome from power and placing PAPAL Rome into power. The evidence is clear and this places this verse around the date of 538AD.
So France is now on the scene and is a major player in the affairs of the world, which is why God dedicates nearly a whole chapter to France in Revelation 11. And Remember, the books of Daniel and Revelation support and explain each other!
Daniel 11:32 ...'And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.'
Back in verse 30, we learned that Rome, in the person(s) of Constantine and the likes of Justinian had "intelligence with them [bishops of Rome] who forsake the holy covenant." So it was the bishops of Rome who forsook the holy covenant of God. And now in verse 32 it says that "such as do wickedly against the covenant", pointing to the bishops and popes of Rome, shall 'he' corrupt with flatteries. Who is the 'he'? Who has the 'he' and 'him' and 'kings' been right throughout the chapter? Civil rulers. Who is the main civil ruler which came onto the scene and was the champion of the Catholic Church during this time and through the 'dark ages'? France! French kings like Pepin, Charlemagne and their successors helped the popes more than any other nation throughout this time. But the "people that know their God", God's true people like the Waldenses and Albigenses "did exploits" in spreading the scriptures and God's truth.
Daniel 11:33-35 ...'And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days. Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries. And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.'
Even though God's true people who "did exploits" in "instructing many" in the Word of God, they were heavily persecuted, because they exposed the evils and errors of the Roman Catholic Church and the kings who supported her. The 'many days' points to the 1260 years that the Papacy ruled with the support of the kings of the earth, especially France during this time. Verses 33-35 explain the trials and tribulations that God's people went through during the 1260 years, including the great Protestant reformation and the protest of the princes which helped God's people "with a little help." And this was to take place "to the time of the end", which was the "appointed time" in which God was going to bring about the "mortal wound" to the Papacy.
Daniel 11:36 ...'And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.'
Now this is where there is a parting of belief between many in the church today due to the understanding of who this 'king' is in verse 36. But there need not be any confusion if we would just take the Bible as it reads in the context of what is being said. What have we learned regarding 'kings' mentioned all throughout this chapter? That they are civil kings. To say this king is the pope or Papacy does not fit with the context of the whole chapter. Yes, the Papacy is there in the background, which was that "abomination of desolation" which the civil kings put in place. But this king cannot be the Papacy, which we will give reasons further down.
Remember in verse 3 it says "he shall do according to his will" introducing a new power on the scene (Greece), just as verse 16 did with the same quote "he shall do according to his own will," introducing the Roman power. So now we have the same quote in verse 36 - "the king shall do according to his will." Thus we have a NEW power coming on the scene.
So who is this king in verse 36? Well, who was now on the scene as the main supporter of the Catholic Church? France. Now what did verse 35 say regarding making the saints "white" and to "try them"? That this would take place "to the time of the end." The time of the end is 1798. Keep that in mind. Now when we look at verse 36, it says this king would do according to his will, and magnify himself and prosper "until the indignation be accomplished." That word 'indignation' literally means, fierce anger. Do we have anyting in history showing a king/kingdom which would bring about this "indignation" around the "time of the end"? Yes! France, with that indignation being the French revolution, which was brought about by the destruction of Protestantism and lifting up the Papacy. Look at the following quote from the Spirit of Prophecy:
"In no land had the spirit of enmity against Christ and the truth been more strikingly displayed than in giddy and godless France. Nowhere had the gospel encountered more bitter and cruel opposition. In the streets of Paris, Christ had indeed been crucified in the person of his saints. The world still recalls with shuddering horror the scenes of that most cowardly and cruel onslaught, the Massacre of St. Bartholomew. The king of France, urged on by Romish priests and prelates, lent his sanction to the dreadful work. The palace bell, tolling at midnight, gave the signal for the slaughter to begin. Protestants by thousands, sleeping quietly in their homes, trusting to the plighted honor of their king, were dragged forth without a warning, and murdered in cold blood ... In France arose an atheistical power that openly declared war against the authority of Heaven. Men threw off all restraint. The law of God was trampled under foot. Those who could engage in the most Heaven-daring blasphemy and the most abominable wickedness were most highly exalted ... Terrible indeed was the condition of infidel France." (Spirit of Prophecy, Vol.4, p.191-192).
Surely this is the indignation that was to be accomplished towards the time of the end (1798) by France. Some apply the king of verse 36 to King Louis XVI, who was the last king of France and the one who brought about the French revolution which began in 1789 and lasted until 1798-1799. But whether this can be applied to king Louis specifically or not, we can with certainty apply this king to France. God devotes nearly a whole chapter to the scenes that took place in France in Revelation 11, and this matches with what we see in Daniel 11. What was the other result of the indignation being accomplished by France at the end of the revolution around 1798? The Papacy received its mortal wound. At the hands of who? Yes, you guessed it! France!
Verses 36 to 39 go on to say that this 'king' would "magnify himself above every god" (vs.36) and "not regard the god of his fathers" (vs.37) and then go on to "do in the strong holds with a strange god" (vs.39). This, as Revelation 11 does, is speaking of the conditions leading up to and including the French revolution, in which France lifted itself up above every god and regarded not the god of his fathers by completely rejecting the God of heaven in the revolution and then honoring a strange god by introducing the 'goddess of reason.' Now how can this be applied to the Papacy? The Popes at this time continued to honor the god of their fathers (the trinity). And the Popes did not go on to then introduce a 'strange god.' Yes, the trinity is a 'strange god,' but the point is, the popes did not adopt a strange god that their fathers knew not. They simply continued worshipping their false god right from the very early centuries. So this doesn't match the Papacy. But it matches France in every way!
Remember, Daniel 11 is a literal history of civil kings and kingdoms.
Daniel 11:40 ...'And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.'
WAYMARK 5 - The term 'time of the end' refers to the time from when Papal Rome lost it's power over the world and the
darkness of Papal Rome was lifted and the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ shone around the world. Papal Rome reigned from 538AD to 1798AD, so 1798 is the date
referred to as the 'time of the end.' Did anything happen during this time to match verse 40? Yes! There was a triangular war between France, Egypt and Turkey.
Egypt (king of the south) "pushed at" France due to the invasion of Napoleon, and then Turkey (king of the north - now ruling that northern division) "came against"
France "like a whirlwind." History records that the Turks
came out triumphant from this battle, in fulfillment of verse 40 which says "he shall enter into the countries and shall overflow and pass over."
So the date for verse 40 is around 1798AD.
Verse 41 says that "He shall enter ALSO into the glorious land and many countries shall be overthrown." The fact that it says 'he shall ALSO,' means it is continuing with that power which came out victorious from verse 40, which were the Turks, the king of the north. PLEASE NOTE: Notice that it says he enters into the 'glorious land.' We were told in verse 16 of Daniel 11 that Rome stood 'in the glorious land.' And this is taken literally to mean Palestine, which everyone agrees on. So thus we must also take the 'glorious land' in verse 41 to be literal Palestine, otherwise we do great damage to the context and language of Daniel 11. This cannot be symbolic as some try to apply it. It has to be literal, and the Turks fulfilled this by entering into Palestine. Verses 41-43 then go on to record further conquests of the Turks - the Ottoman Empire (king of the north).
Daniel 11:44 ...'But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.'
The tidings, or reports, that came out of the east and north, were the reports of Persia and Russia conspiring together to destroy the Ottoman Empire. Thus 'he', the king of the north (Ottoman Empire) went forth with fury to destroy. This was fulfilled in the Crimean war of the 1850's, in which Russia and Persia failed in their attempt to destroy the Ottoman Empire.
Daniel 11:45 ...'And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.'
The 'tabernacles of his palace' means the 'seat of government' of the Turkish kingdom. And where does this last verse say the 'seat of government' of the Turkish [Islamic] power would be moved to? "Between the seas, in the glorious holy mountain,". Now remember, Rome entered the 'glorious land' in verse 16, which referred to literal Palestine, which everyone agrees with. But for some strange reason, many people today turn the 'glorious land' and 'glorious holy mountain' into symbols, which Elder James White said were 'cast off' in this chapter, and which we can clearly see from reading it ourselves. Now if the glorious land is Israel, then what is the 'glorious holy mountain' going to be? Jerusalem!
Daniel 6:10 ...'Now when Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he went into his house; and his windows being open in his chamber toward Jerusalem, he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime.'
At this point in time, Israel had been captured by Babylon and Jerusalem had been destroyed. And yet! Daniel still prayed towards Jerusalem. Why? Because he understood Jerusalem to be the 'glorious holy mountain' within the 'glorious land'. And what place on earth will New Jerusalem rest upon? Jerusalem! Therefore Jerusalem is the 'glorious holy mountain' referred to.
"Turkey stands as a national guidepost to the world, that men may know what is going on in the sanctuary above." (Stephen Haskell, The Story of Daniel the Prophet, 1901, p.248)
Now there are two views for the fulfillment of verse 45. The first view says that verse 45 has already been fulfilled through Cemal Pasha, who in 1915, moved his headquaters from Damascus to the Augusta Victoria Hospital in Jerusalem during World War I. Thus fulfilling the part of verse 45 which says "he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace in between the seas and the glorious holy mountain." In the lead up to the World War I, the Ottoman Empire lost most of its territories, was expelled out of Europe, and then lost Jerusalem to the British in 1917, and finally the Ottoman Empire came to its end in 1922, thus according to the first view, fulfilling the last part of Daniel 11:45, with the Ottoman Empire coming to its end. The "standing up" of Michael in Daniel 12:1 "at that time" is not, according to this first view, the specific time of the fall of the Ottoman Empire, but a non specific time during the "time of the end." So according to this first view, Daniel 11:45 is completely fulfilled, and we are now seeing the final events of Revelation take place before the "standing up" of Michael.
The second view says that the nation of Turkey, even though it is no longer the Ottoman Empire, but the Republic of Turkey, still continues as the 'king of the north,' as occupying that part of the northern division of Alexander's kingdom. And that Daniel 11:45 will not be fulfilled until Turkey goes for Jerusalem, transferring its capital to that city and then will come to its end.