John Calvin Commentary Daniel 8:2-3

"And I saw in the vision; now it was so, that when I saw, I was in Shushan the palace, which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in the vision, and I was by the river Ulai. Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last." — Daniel 8:2-3 (ASV)

Without any doubt, the Prophet here recognized a new empire was about to arise, which could not happen without Babylon being reduced to slavery. This realization would greatly help to alleviate the cares of the devout and mitigate their sorrows, as they witnessed what they had previously thought unbelievable: the approaching destruction of that horrible tyranny under which they had been so cruelly oppressed.

And if the liberty of returning to their country was not immediately granted to the people, it would be a significant consolation to behold God’s judgment against the Chaldeans as foretold by the prophets. We must now examine the Prophet’s language. I have seen in a vision, he says. This word חזון, chezon, a “vision,” is added to show us that the ram mentioned was not seen with physical eyes.

Therefore, this was a heavenly oracle and should have raised the beholder above all human sensations, enabling him to discern from a lofty watchtower what was hidden from the rest of mankind. He did not see, then, what ordinary men might behold; instead, God showed him in a vision things that no mortal senses could apprehend.

He next adds, The vision was shown to me, Daniel, and I happened, he says, when I saw it, to be in Shushan. Some think Daniel was then dwelling in Persia, but this view is not at all probable. For who could persuade the holy Prophet of God—who had been taken captive with the rest and was in service to the king of Babylon—to leave as if he were entirely his own master and go into Persia when the Persians were then declared enemies?

This is not at all likely, and I wonder what can lead people to adopt this interpretation, which is so contrary to all reason. For we need not dispute about a matter that is not at all obscure if we consider the Prophet’s words, as he removes all doubt by saying he was in Shushan when he saw—that is, when he was caught up by the prophetic spirit beyond himself and above the world.

The Prophet does not say he lived in Shushan or in the neighborhood; he was there in the vision only. The next verse, too, sufficiently shows that he was then in Chaldea, for he says it was in the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar. By naming the king, he clearly expresses that he then lived under his power and dominion.

It is clearly to be gathered from these words, without the slightest doubt, that the Prophet then lived in Chaldea. And perhaps Babylon had already been besieged, as we saw before. He says he was in the palace at Shushan. I do not know how I ought to translate this word, הבירה, hebireh, as I see no reason for preferring the meaning “palace” to that of “citadel.”

We are sure of the nobility and renown of the citadel, which was later the head of the East, for all nations and tribes received their laws, rights, and judgments from there. At the same time, I think this citadel was not yet built then, as its dominion over the Persian territory was not firmly established until the successors of Cyrus. We might perhaps distinguish Shushan from Persia proper, yet since it is usually treated as part of that kingdom, I will not press the distinction.

The region is, however, far milder and more fertile than Persia, as it receives its name from being flowery and abounding in roses. Thus, the Prophet says he was there in a vision.

He afterwards repeats this: I saw in a vision, and behold I was near the river Ulai. The Latin writers mention a river Eulaeus, and as there is a great similarity between the words, I do not hesitate to understand Daniel’s language as referring to the Eulaeus. The repetition is not unnecessary; it adds certainty to the prophecy because Daniel affirms it.

He affirms it not to have been some vanishing phantom, as a vision might be suspected of being, but clearly and certainly a divine revelation, as he will later relate. He also says, he raised his eyes upwards. This attentive attitude signifies the same thing, as experience shows us how often people are deceived by wandering in erroneous imaginations. But Daniel here testifies to his raising his eyes upwards because he knew himself to be divinely called to discern future events.

He next adds, And behold a ram stood at the bank of the river, and it had horns. He now compares the empire of Persia and Media to a ram. It should not seem absurd that God proposed various similitudes to His servant, because his duty was to teach an untutored people in various ways; and we know this vision was presented to the Prophet, not for his private instruction only, but for the common benefit of the whole people.

I do not think we need to inquire meticulously why the Persian kings are called rams. I know of no valid reason, unless perhaps to make a comparison between them and Alexander of Macedon and his successors. If so, when God, under the image of a ram, shows His Prophet the Persian Empire, He does not illustrate its nature in an absolute sense, but only by comparison with that of Alexander.

We are well aware of the opposition between these two empires. The Persian monarchy is called “a ram” with reference to the Macedonian, which, as we shall later see, bears the name of “he-goat” because of its antagonism. And we may find the best reason for this comparison in the humble origin of the kings of Persia.

Very appropriately, then, Cyrus, the first ruler of this empire, is here portrayed for us under the form or image of a ram. His “horn” produced a shock throughout the whole earth, when no one expected anything to spring from a region not at all abounding in anything noble.

And as for Alexander, he is called a “he-goat” in relation to the “ram,” being far more agile, and yet more obscure in his origin. For what was Macedon but a mere corner of Greece? But I do not propose to draw out the parallel between these points; it is enough that God wishes to show His Prophet and the whole Church how, from among the Persians—unknown as they were then and despised by their neighbors—a king would arise to consume the Median power, as we shall see shortly, and also to overthrow the Babylonian monarchy.

Behold, therefore, he says, a ram stood before the river, or at the bank of the river, since Cyrus subdued both the Medes and his grandfather, as historians tell us. Cyrus then rushed forth from his own mountains and stood at the bank of the river. He also says, He had two horns. Here the Prophet presents two horns for two empires, and not at all for two persons.

For although Cyrus married the daughter of his uncle Cyaxares, we know the Persian empire lasted a long time and supplied historians with a long list of kings. Since Cyrus had so many successors, by the two horns God doubtless showed His Prophet those two empires—the Medes and Persians—united under one sovereignty. Therefore, when the ram appeared to the Prophet, it represented both kingdoms under one symbol.

The context confirms this by saying, The two horns were lofty, one higher than the other, and this was raised backwards. The two horns were lofty. For, though the Persian territory was not rich, and its people were rustic, living in woods, leading an austere life and despising all luxuries, the nation was always warlike.

Therefore, the Prophet says this horn was higher than the other, meaning the empire of the Medes. Now Cyrus surpassed his father-in-law Darius in fame, authority, and rank; yet he always permitted Darius to enjoy royal majesty until the end of his life. Since Darius was an old man, Cyrus could easily concede the highest honor to him without any loss to himself.

Regarding the following period, then, Cyrus was clearly pre-eminent, as he was certainly superior to Darius (whom Xenophon calls Cyaxares). For this reason, then, this horn was higher. Meanwhile, however, the Prophet shows how gradually Cyrus was exalted. The horn rose backwards; that is, 'afterwards'—meaning, although the horn of the Median kingdom was more illustrious and conspicuous, yet the horn which rose afterwards obscured the brightness and glory of the former one.

This agrees with the accounts of secular history, for every reader of those accounts will find nothing recorded by Daniel that was not fulfilled by the event. Let us continue.