(7) A fourth beast.--This is so different from the preceding three, and so terrible in appearance, that Daniel can hardly find words to describe it. The distinguishing feature of it is the power which it possesses of breaking and stamping out all that it meets. In this way it corresponds to "iron that breaketh in pieces, and subdueth all things." (Comp. Daniel 2:40.) The description of the destructive might of this beast is heightened by the mention of "iron teeth" and "brazen claws." It should be noticed that the horns imply strength, while the ten horns correspond to the ten toes of the image.

The residue--i.e., what it did not destroy with its teeth it trampled upon and annihilated with its feet.

Verse 7. - After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. The version of the LXX. differs considerably, though not essentially, "After these things I beheld in a night vision a fourth terrible beast, and the fear of it excelled in strength; it had great iron teeth, it devoured and pounded down; it trode round about with its feet; it differed from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns, and many counsels were in its horns." The sense of this does not really differ, save in the last clause, which seems to belong to the next verse. Theodotion agrees with the Massoretic text. The Peshitta differs only by having" after these things," following the LXX., instead of "after this." The identification of the empire intended by this beast has been the crux of interpreters. Practically all ancient authorities - Josephus, and the author of the Apocalypse of Baruch being among the number - maintain the Roman Empire to be meant. On the other hand, a very large number of modern critics, not merely of the exclusively critical school, have held that it refers either to the Greek Empire as a whole, or to the Seleucid portion of it. As we shall discuss this subject in a separate excursus, we shall at present look at the principles to be adopted in dealing with such a question. The important point is the numerical note of this "beast." It is "ten" - the same it may be remarked, as in the feet of the image of Nebuchadnezzar's dream. When we turn from the Apocalypse of the Old Testament to the Apocalypse of the New, we find "ten" the note of Rome. Even though we should put this to the one side, as merely the opinion of an apostle, and therefore not to be considered at all in comparison with that of Hitzig or Von Lengerke, yet he was writing little more than a couple of centuries from the time when, according to critics, Daniel was written; moreover, he was in the direct line of apocalyptic tradition. The Apocalypse of Baruch, written in all probability B.C. 60, has the same view, and it is separated by little more than a century from the time of the Maccabees. The Fourth Book of Esdras, written about A.D. , has the same view. All three books imply that it is the universally received opinion. This view is really the only one that fairly meets the case. The view which separates the Seleucid Empire from that of Alexander may be laid aside, although the first three empires are correctly interpreted, because it is directly controverted by the statement that this fourth empire is to be diverse from all that had gone before. The empire of the Seleucids was in no sense diverse from that of Alexander. This fourth empire was to be stronger than all that had gone before. The Seleucid Empire was notoriously and obviously less powerful than the empire of Alexander had been, and was merely a match for the empire of the Ptolemies. Further, the next chapter shows that the writer of Daniel regarded the empire of the Diadochi as really a continuation of that of Alexander the Great. The other view rests on a division between the Median and the Persian empires, which is contradicted by any fair interpretation of this book. The next chapter shows clearly that the writer regarded the Medo-Persian power as one, but as having two dominant races. The" great iron teeth" of the beast have a reference to the iron legs of the dream-image which appeared to Nebuchadnezzar. This beast "is diverse from all the beasts that were before it." In all the previous empires, the constitution was avowedly monarchical. With the Roman, the republican constitution appeared, and even under the emperors the forms of that constitution were preserved. In this sense it was diverse from all the preceding empires. Mr. Bevan thinks "the actrocious massacres at Tyro and elsewhere, by which Alexander en-deavoured to strike terror into the conquered races," is symbolized by the monster "devouring, crushing," etc. Mr. Bevan must never have read the accounts of the conquests of Asshur-bani-pal. He seems to have forgotten the treatment meted out to Samos and Miletus by the Persians.

7:1-8 This vision contains the same prophetic representations with Nebuchadnezzar's dream. The great sea agitated by the winds, represented the earth and the dwellers on it troubled by ambitious princes and conquerors. The four beasts signified the same four empires, as the four parts of Nebuchadnezzar's image. Mighty conquerors are but instruments of God's vengeance on a guilty world. The savage beast represents the hateful features of their characters. But the dominion given to each has a limit; their wrath shall be made to praise the Lord, and the remainder of it he will restrain.After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast,.... Not in another night, as Jarchi; but in the same night, and in the same visions of it; only after he had seen the other three successively, then last of all he saw this fourth beast; and more being said of this than of the rest, shows that this was the principal thing in the vision to be observed, as being to endure until, and having a close connection with, the kingdom of the Messiah; which, arising, shall destroy it, and take place of it: this is not the Turkish empire, as Aben Ezra, and others: nor the kingdom of the Seleucidae, as Grotius, and others; to which neither the characters, nor the duration of it, agree; but the Roman empire, which succeeded the Grecian, so Gorionides (g):

dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; exceeding powerful, as the Roman empire was, and terrible to all the kingdoms of the earth; its armies, wherever they came, struck terror among the nations, and threw them into a panic, killing, wasting, robbing all they met with (h); and especially it was terrible to Christians, by their persecutions of them, as both Rome Pagan and Rome Papal have been. Rome has its name from strength with the Greeks, and from height with the Hebrews, as Jerom (i) observes:

it had great iron teeth; which may design its generals and emperors, such as Scipio, Pompey, Julius Caesar, and others; which crushed and devoured all that came in their way: this monarchy answers to the legs and feet of iron in Nebuchadnezzar's dream:

it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it; it devoured nations, broke kingdoms in pieces, and brought them in subjection to them; reducing them to the greatest servitude, and obliging them to pay heavy taxes and tribute:

it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it: in its original, language, laws, customs, and forms of government; it was such a monster, that no name could be given it; there was no one beast in nature to which it could be compared; it had all the ill properties of the other beasts, for craft, cruelty oppression, and tyranny; and therefore John describes this same beast as being like a leopard, having the feet of a bear and the mouth of a lion. Revelation 13:2,

and it had ten horns; which are explained of ten kings or kingdoms, Daniel 7:24, the same with the ten toes in Nebuchadnezzar's dream and with the ten kings that received power as kings with the beast or ten kingdoms, into which the Roman empire was divided about the time of the rise of antichrist,see Gill on Rev_17:12.

(g) (Curt. Hist.) l. 3. c. 15. p. 221. (h) Raptores Orbis, &c. Taciti Vita Agricolae, c. 30. (i) Adv. Jovinian. l. 2. fol. 32. L.