In the Hebrew this phrase presents confusion of gender. The word for “them,” hem, is masculine. This indicates that, grammatically, the antecedent is “winds” (v. 8) and not “horns,” since “winds” may be either masculine or feminine, but “horns,” only feminine. On the other hand the word for “one,” ’achath, is feminine, suggesting “horns” as the antecedent. ’Achath could, of course, refer back to the word for “winds,” which occurs most frequently in the feminine. But it is doubtful that the writer would assign two different genders to the same noun in such close contextual relationship. To reach grammatical agreement, either ’achath should be changed into a masculine, thus making the entire phrase refer clearly to “winds,” or the word for “them” should be changed into a feminine, in which case the reference would be ambiguous, since either “winds” or “horns” may be the antecedent. A number of Hebrew manuscripts have the word for “them” in the feminine. If these manuscripts reflect the correct reading, the passage is still ambiguous.

 Commentators who interpret the “little horn” of v. 9 to refer to Rome have been at a loss to explain satisfactorily how Rome could be said to arise out of one of the divisions of Alexander’s empire. If “them” refers to “winds,” all difficulty vanishes. The passage then simply states that from one of the four points of the compass would come another power. Rome came from the west. In the literal explanation of the symbols of the vision Rome is said to arise “in the latter time of their kingdom” (v. 23), that is, the “kingdom” of the four horns. However, v. 23 refers only to the time when the little horn would arise and says nothing of the place of its rising, whereas v. 9 is concerned exclusively with its location.

 It should be remembered that the prophet is here giving a running account of the prophetic symbolization, as the scenes were presented to him. He is not yet interpreting the vision. The interpretation of this feature of the vision occurs in v. 23. An important rule to follow when interpreting the symbols of visions is to assign an interpretation only to those features of pictorial representation that were intended to have interpretative value. As in parables, certain features are needed to complete the dramatic presentation, but are not necessarily significant of themselves. Which of these have interpretative value, Inspiration alone can determine. Seeing that in this instance Inspiration (v. 23) speaks only of the time when the power represented by this horn was to emerge, and says nothing as to its geographical point of origin, there is no reason for us to lay stress on the phrase, “out of one of them.”

 Inasmuch as the vision of ch. 8 closely parallels the prophetic outlines of chs. 2 and 7, and inasmuch as in both of those outlines the power succeeding Greece is Rome (see on chs. 2:40; 7:7), the reasonable assumption here is that the “horn” power is of v. 8 also applies to Rome. This interpretation is confirmed by the fact that Rome precisely fulfilled the various specifications of the vision.

This little horn represents Rome in both its phases, pagan and papal.

 Daniel saw Rome first in its pagan, imperial phase, warring against the Jewish people and the early Christians, and then in its papal phase, continuing down to our own day and into the future, warring against the true church. On this double application see on vs. 13, 23.

 Heb. yether, basically meaning “remainder.” In a few instances it describes, as here, that which is above measure, in the sense of leaving a remainder. It is translated “excellency” (Gen. 49:3), “plentifully” (Ps 31:23), “much more abundant” (Isa. 56:12). The word translated “very” in Dan. 8:8 is me’od, the more common word for “exceedingly.” In the OT me’od is translated “exceeding” or “exceedingly” 22 times (Gen. 13:13; 15:1; etc.) in its simple form and 9 times in its repeated form. It cannot be argued that yether (Dan. 8:9) represents a greater degree than me’od. Any excelling greatness in Rome over that of Greece must be proved historically, not on the basis of these words.

Egypt was long an unofficial protectorate of Rome. Her fate was already in Rome’s hands in 168 B.C. when Antiochus Epiphanes, who was seeking to make war on the Ptolemies, was ordered out of the country. Egypt, still under the administration of its Ptolemaic rulers, was a pawn of Roman Eastern policy for many years before it became, in 30 B.C., a Roman province.

The Seleucid Empire lost its westernmost lands to Rome as early as 190 B.C., and finally became the Roman province of Syria in 65 B.C. or shortly thereafter.

 Heb. ṣebi, “ornament,” “decoration,” “glory.” Either Jerusalem or the land of Palestine is here referred to. Ṣebi is translated “glorious” in ch. 11:16, 41.

However, there the Hebrew has the word for “land,” whereas here “land” is understood.

Palestine was incorporated into the Roman Empire in 63 B.C.