Daniel 8:9

And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east. and toward the pleasant land. The Greek versions here differ considerably from the Massoretic text. The LXX . is as follows: "And out of one there sprang a strong horn, and it prevailed and smote toward the south, toward the south-west ( ἐπὶ νότον ), and toward the east, and toward the north." In this case, ἐπὶ νότον is clearly a doublet—an alternative rendering that has got into the text from the margin. ἐπὶ βοῤῥὰν results from reading tzephonah ( צְפוֹנָה ) instead of tzebee ( צֶבִי ). Theodotion renders, "From one of them went forth a strong horn, and was magnified exceedingly to the south and to the power"—reading צָבָא ( tzaba ), "host," for tzebee. It is to be observed that both translate mitztze ‛eeroth as "strong" ( ἰσχυρός ) instead of "little." The reason of this is that they have taken מְ as equivalent to ex , therefore equivalent to a negative. The Peshitta agrees with the Authorized in reading mitztze ‛eroth as "little," but leaves out the difficult final word rendered "the pleasant land" in our Authorized Version. Jerome translates mitztze'eeroth by modicum , and tzebee by fortitudinem —a combination of Theodotion and the Massoretic; he must have had tzaba in his text instead of tzebee , — this may have been due to the fact that tzaba occurs in the next verse. The reference is sufficiently obvious to Antiochus. The description is accurate; he sprang from one of the four horns or dynasties that succeeded the great conqueror. He carried his arms to the east, but mainly to the south against Egypt. The great difficulties are in the two Hebrew words mitztze ‛eeroth and tzebee. As to the first word, the fact that the two Greek versions have read it are conclusive against the suggestion of Gratz and Hitzig, supported by Bevan, that we should omit מִן . ( min ). Jephet-ibn-Ali takes min as denoting the origin of the horn, "from a little one." The further suggestion of Gratz, that we should adopt the reading of the LXX ; is rightly combatted by Professor Bevan. The readings alike of the LXX . and Theodotion could have sprung from the Massoretic reading, whereas neither of these could so readily be the original reading. It was necessary that Israel should be prominent in this part of the prophecy; it all leads up to the persecution the Jews endured at the hands of Epiphanes. It is necessary, then, to hold that this word, whatever reading we adopt, and whatever immediate meaning we assign to it, must refer to Palestine. Ewald renders it "ornament;" Bevan, "glory."