THE CONFLICT BEGINS

Listen! Describing the start of this dramatic conflict, Jehovah’s angel says: “The king of the south will become strong, even one of his [Alexander’s] princes; and he [the king of the north] will prevail against him and will certainly rule with extensive dominion greater than that one’s ruling power.” (Daniel 11:5) http://biblize.com/search?q=Daniel+11:5&q_scope=

The designations “the king of the north” and “the king of the south” refer to kings north and south of Daniel’s people, who were by then freed from Babylonian captivity and restored to the land of Judah. The initial “king of the south” was Ptolemy I of Egypt. One of Alexander’s generals who prevailed against Ptolemy I and ruled “with extensive dominion” was Syrian King Seleucus I Nicator. He assumed the role of “the king of the north.”

At the onset of the conflict, the land of Judah was under the dominion of the king of the south. From about 320 B.C.E., Ptolemy I influenced Jews to come to Egypt as colonists. A Jewish colony flourished in Alexandria, where Ptolemy I founded a famous library. The Jews in Judah remained under the control of Ptolemaic Egypt, the king of the south, until 198 B.C.E.

Concerning the two kings, the angel prophesied: “At the end of some years they will ally themselves with each other, and the very daughter of the king of the south will come to the king of the north in order to make an equitable arrangement. But she will not retain the power of her arm; and he will not stand, neither his arm; and she will be given up, she herself, and those bringing her in, and he who caused her birth, and the one making her strong in those times.” (Daniel 11:6) How did this come to be?http://biblize.com/search?q=Daniel+11:6&q_scope=

The prophecy did not take note of Seleucus I Nicator’s son and successor, Antiochus I, because he did not wage a decisive war against the king of the south. But his successor, Antiochus II, fought a long war against Ptolemy II, the son of Ptolemy I. Antiochus II and Ptolemy II respectively constituted the king of the north and the king of the south. Antiochus II was married to Laodice, and they had a son named Seleucus II, whereas Ptolemy II had a daughter named Berenice. In 250 B.C.E., these two kings entered into “an equitable arrangement.” To pay the price of this alliance, Antiochus II divorced his wife Laodice and married Berenice, “the very daughter of the king of the south.” By Berenice, he had a son who became heir to the Syrian throne instead of the sons of Laodice.

Berenice’s “arm,” or supporting power, was her father, Ptolemy II. When he died in 246 B.C.E., she did not “retain the power of her arm” with her husband. Antiochus II rejected her, remarried Laodice, and named their son to be his successor. As Laodice planned, Berenice and her son were murdered. Evidently, the attendants who had brought Berenice from Egypt to Syria—“those bringing her in”—suffered the same end. Laodice even poisoned Antiochus II, and thus “his arm,” or power, also did “not stand.” Hence, Berenice’s father—“he who caused her birth”—and her Syrian husband—who had temporarily made her “strong”—both died. This left Seleucus II, the son of Laodice, as Syrian king. How would the next Ptolemaic king react to all of this?