11:1–45 This section outlines the succession of kings during the transition period from Persian dominance to Greek dominance—represented by the third and fourth beasts of Dan 7, and the ram and goat in ch. 8. The struggle for control of Palestine between the rival Hellenistic Greek kingdoms of the Ptolemies and Seleucids also receives attention. The career of the little horn of chs. 7–8 also receives greater detail. All of these events were experienced by the Jewish people after Daniel’s lifetime.

11:1–45 This section outlines the succession of kings during the transition period from Persian dominance to Greek dominance—represented by the third and fourth beasts of Dan 7, and the ram and goat in ch. 8. The struggle for control of Palestine between the rival Hellenistic Greek kingdoms of the Ptolemies and Seleucids also receives attention. The career of the little horn of chs. 7–8 also receives greater detail. All of these events were experienced by the Jewish people after Daniel’s lifetime.

The identities of the three kings (in addition to Cyrus; see 10:1) are uncertain. They may be Darius, Xerxes (also known as Ahasuerus), and Artaxerxes.

Daniel 10:1 may indicate that the visions of chs. 10–12 take place during the reign of King Cyrus of Persia. The only other Persian kings mentioned specifically in the Hebrew Bible are Darius, Xerxes (also known as Ahasuerus), and Artaxerxes (see Ezra 4:5–7)—the most likely candidates to be referred to here. The four together may be represented by the four wings and four heads on the leopard-like beast of Dan 7:6. ch. 11 closely tracks events associated with ancient Persia and Greece until late in the chapter, when correlations become less transparent. This has led many to suspect that the remainder of the chapter should be interpreted eschatologically.

Likely Darius III Codomannus (336–330 BC). This king could alternatively be Xerxes I, but the connection with the fall of Persia to Alexander in the next verse makes Darius III more likely.

Darius III Codomannus, the last Persian king, was defeated by Alexander. Since Alexander’s campaign is mentioned in v. 3, the fourth king here is likely Darius III, with whom the Persian kingdom collapsed. He is called “a fourth” in addition to the three in the beginning of v. 2, although those three complete a group of four kings (see previous note). The sequence of Persian kings in Daniel is Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes (also known as Ahasuerus), Artaxerxes, and Darius III. There were other kings of Persia, but these are the five with which Daniel is concerned.

The Hebrew phrase here can be translated as “warrior king,” which describes well the career of Alexander.

Alexander the Great (356–323 BC)

Alexander the Great (356–323 BC) was one of the greatest military conquerors of all time. In less than 13 years, he gained control of all of Greece in the west and extended his rule into the Tigris and Euphrates Valley in the east (Arrian, Anab. 7.28.1; Diodorus, Bibliotheca historica 17. 8.1–2; 17.65.5; Plutarch, Alex. 11–12). Having conquered Persia, he pressed the attack further to the borders of India (Strabo Geogr. 14.4.27; 1 Maccabees 1:1–7; Diodorus, Lib. Hist.17.85.6–7). His advance into the subcontinent was not halted by opposing forces, but by his own war-weary generals, who refused to heed their ambitious leader and declined to cross the Ganges River (Plutarch, Alex. 71.1–5; Arrian, Anab. 7.8.1–3). Nevertheless, in a short period of time, Alexander had redrawn the map of the ancient world—all before he was 30. Perhaps more importantly, Alexander crafted a strategy for conquest and control that would serve as the blueprint for world rulers in the ages to come—especially for the Romans.

Yet Alexander’s meteoric rise to power was not a result of his genius alone. He built his empire upon the shoulders of his father, Philip II of Macedon. Philip’s militant drive to subdue surrounding nations, regardless of distance, paved the way for his son to conquer the world. Yet even Philip’s larger-than-life legacy was not enough for Alexander. He believed that the blood of the gods coursed through his veins. In his view, Hercules was the progenitor of his father’s side of the family, and his mother, Olympias, was a descendent of Achilles (Plutarch, Alex. 2.1). Alexander took this to mean that he was destined for world domination.

As you saw the iron mixed with soft clay, so they will mix with one another in marriage, but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay