The Four Heads of the Leopard

The four‑headed leopard of Daniel 7:6 and four‑horned goat of Dan.8:8 in the visions of successive world empires symbolised by various wild beasts is stated in the Book of Daniel, and is generally accepted by prophetic expositors as denoting the empire of Greece, founded by Alexander the Great and destined to break into pieces shortly after his death. The four heads and horns, it is indicated, picture four divisions into which the empire resolved itself, each under a different king. At the time in question, the 4th Century B.C., Alexander had invaded Asia to do battle with the Persian empire ruled by Darius Codomannus, and had slain the latter in battle, thereby winning for himself the submission of all the Persian dominions, ranging from Egypt in the west to India in the east, including in the process the nation of Judah. After pursuing his conquering career as far as southern Asia and the Indus valley, he returned on his tracks and reached Babylon, and there he died, the year being 323 B.C.

This, say the majority of commentators, is where the four heads and horns come into the picture. Alexander, they say, divided his empire between four of his leading generals. Cassander was to take European Greece; Ptolemy, Egypt, North Africa and Arabia; Lysimachus, Asiatic Greece (modern Turkey); and Seleucus, Syria, Judah, Babylonia and Persia and the East to India. The picture afforded is that of an orderly and immediate transfer of sovereignty to the four generals, thus fulfilling the prophecy. But it has been pointed out that according to the historians there was a fifth general, Antigonus, who also was in process of carving out an empire for himself from the dominions of Alexander. This leads to the question; is the vision of Daniel incorrect and should there have been five heads, or does the fault lie with the historians?

It can be said at once that Daniel was right; the empire did divide into four sovereign entities. The apparent paradox arises from an oversimplification of the position on the part of the commentators—most of whom copied from one another anyway. It is not certain that Alexander on his deathbed divided his empire between four of his generals; so far as can be substantiated, he left no definite instructions. (He is reputed to have died after a drinking bout and may have been in no position to do so anyway). It is true that 1 Maccabees 1:5‑6 (Apocrypha) detailing the events of those days, does say "after these things he (Alexander) fell sick and perceived that he should die. Wherefore he called his servants, such as were honourable, and had been brought up with him from his youth, and parted his kingdom among them, while he was yet alive." This, written about two centuries after the event, gives no guide to the number of kingdoms. The Roman historian Livy, of 1st cent. BC, says of the empire that it was "broken up into many kingdoms by reason of the death of Alexander; all in power were exhausting their strength in the eager rapacity for extended dominion." (Livy 14:7). Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Greek historian just before the beginning of the Christian era, says almost the same thing. (Ann. Rom.1:2‑3) Josephus.1st cent. AD, mentions five contending generals, of whom Antigonus was one and concludes "and while these princes ambitiously strove one against another, every one for his own principality, it came to pass that there were continual wars..." (Ant. Bk. 12. Ch.1). Plutarch, Greek historian of the 1st cent. AD., also mentions the five generals and dwells upon the continual wars between them. But Polybius, another Greek historian who lived little more than a century after the events and therefore nearer in time than any of the others, refers to four kingdoms as emanating from Alexander’s dominions (Polyb.2:3‑5).

The essence of the whole matter is that after the death of Alexander there was a general scramble between his leading generals for power. This lasted for some twenty years after which four generals remained and they headed four separate kingdom‑empires. Antigonus was the senior and most prominent among them and it seems clear that he expected, and intended, to be the head of the entire Greek empire. There was an obstacle. Although Alexander was dead (died 323 BC), his brother Philip was still alive and he held the right to the succession. Antigonus staged a rebellion and in 317 Philip was murdered. A year later Antigonus set out to campaign in Asia for the succession but there was still the son of Philip, lawful heir to the kingship. In 312 Demetrius, an ally of Antigonus, engaged Ptolemy and Seleucus at Gaza and was defeated. Ptolemy thereupon took possession of Egypt and Judea; Seleucus took Babylon, and laid claim to Persia. The "Seleucid Era" thus began on Oct.1:2 BC. In 308 the son of Philip, Alexander Aegus, died and with his death the family and dynasty of Alexander became extinct. The field was now clear for the contending generals. Two years later, in 306, Demetrius defeated Ptolemy in a naval battle, but his victory was indecisive and in 303 he went to Greece to try conclusions with Cassander, in which operation he was unsuccessful. By 302 Antigonus was in Cappadocia facing Lysimachus and Seleucus, who had ganged up against him. This resulted in the battle of Ipsus, in Phrygia, in 301 and in that battle Antigonus was slain and that settled the matter. The four surviving generals parted amicably and each settled down to administer their share of the spoils. Judea came under the domination of Seleucus who established his capital at Antioch of Syria.

The position therefore is that following Alexander’s death there was a twenty‑year period of civil war between the various military factions which was brought to an end by the death of Antigonus who had aspired to inherit the whole of Alexander’s empire. The vision of Daniel indicating four heads was accurate enough; it took twenty years of internecine strife to effect it.

The four heads of state did not survive long. Cassander died in 296 BC, only five years later; Ptolemy in 283. He lasted eighteen years. Two years after that Lysimachus was slain in battle by Seleucus and Seleucus himself was murdered the following year. None of them got much out of it. But the four kingdoms survived into the Roman era. Centuries later the whole of the territory west of the Euphrates was incorporated into the Roman empire and that east of the Euphrates into the kingdom of Parthia, with which the prophecy of Daniel is not concerned. Daniel saw the four‑headed leopard, Greece, superseded by the final great power, Rome, which subsists to this day in the powers of Western Europe.

AOH