Daniel 11:20–12:1 framework at a glance

We will reference the Adventist historicist Alberto Treiyer and his progression:

Imperial Rome → Christianized Rome → Papacy → medieval church-state system → French Revolution/secularism → final conflict between secularism and Babylon → Sunday-law/religious union → 144,000 → Michael/Christ → Second Coming.

The crucial transition occurs at Daniel 11:40:

King of the North = Papacy/Babylon/religious coalition
King of the South = secularism/atheism
King of the East = Christ and His angels

Treiyer’s own chart explicitly makes those identifications.

Daniel 11:20 — The tax collector

“Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes…”

Treiyer identifies this with Augustus Caesar.

The preceding king, in his interpretation, is Julius Caesar. Augustus succeeds him and becomes the great Roman ruler associated with taxation.

The important prophetic transition is therefore:

Seleucid/Ptolemaic conflict → Imperial Rome.

Treiyer sees Daniel 11 moving geographically and politically rather than requiring the “king of the north” to remain the Seleucid dynasty forever.

Daniel 11:21 — The “vile person”

Treiyer identifies the contemptible/vile person with Tiberius Caesar.

He emphasizes that the Hebrew expression does not necessarily mean “the vile person” as though it were a unique title; it can describe a particular king’s character. He argues that Tiberius fits the description.

So:

Daniel 11:21 → Tiberius Caesar

Daniel 11:22 — “The Prince of the Covenant”

This is one of the most important verses in Treiyer’s interpretation.

“…and also the prince of the covenant.”

Treiyer identifies the Prince of the Covenant as Jesus Christ.

He connects Daniel 11:22 directly with Daniel 9’s “Prince” and the covenant.

His chronology is:

Christ’s public ministry begins around AD 27
Christ is crucified around AD 31
The Roman authorities are the ones who execute Him.

Thus Daniel 11 has moved from Roman emperors to the death of Christ under Imperial Rome.

Daniel 11:23 — The covenant/deception

Here Treiyer sees something extremely important beginning:

The union of pagan Rome and Christianity.

He connects the “agreement/covenant” with the eventual Christianization of the Roman Empire, particularly Constantine.

Treiyer argues that the prophetic development is:

Pagan Rome + Christianity → compromised Christianity → Papacy

He emphasizes that the corruption doesn’t suddenly begin with the pope. Rather, the process begins when Christianity becomes joined to imperial power and absorbs pagan elements.

He specifically connects this to Constantine’s nominal conversion and quotes Ellen White’s description of paganism entering the church under the cloak of Christianity.

This is important because Treiyer’s view is somewhat more nuanced than simply saying:

“The papacy suddenly appeared in AD 538.”

For him, the roots of the papal system are already developing in the Constantine era.

Daniel 11:24–27 — Constantine and Licinius

Treiyer applies these verses to the struggle between Constantine and Licinius.

Constantine represents the northern Roman power; Licinius represents the southern Roman power.

He sees the two rulers as sitting together and making agreements while simultaneously plotting against one another.

Eventually Constantine defeats Licinius.

This gives Treiyer another important principle:

“North” and “South” don’t necessarily mean two permanent geographical countries.

They can describe competing political powers within a larger historical system.

Daniel 11:28 — The rise of the papal system

Now Treiyer’s interpretation becomes explicitly ecclesiastical.

“Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his heart shall be against the holy covenant…”

Treiyer interprets the King of the North here as developing into the papal power.

This is the beginning of what he calls:

“The self-aggrandizement of the papacy and the abomination of horror.”

He identifies Daniel 11:28–39 as a long description of the medieval papal system and its church-state power.

Daniel 11:29 — Another papal setback

Treiyer continues with the medieval papacy and its changing political fortunes.

The key point is that the papacy is not simply a religious organization in his interpretation.

It becomes a political-religious authority.

That distinction becomes essential later when he interprets the 1798 wound.

Daniel 11:30 — “Ships of Chittim”

This is one of Treiyer’s more interesting historical identifications.

He interprets the “ships of Chittim” as the Muslim/Islamic expansion across the Mediterranean.

The papacy had become established as a major Western political-religious power, but Islamic expansion increasingly threatened the Mediterranean world.

Treiyer describes the Mediterranean as effectively becoming a Muslim-controlled sea, cutting the papacy off from the Eastern Roman Empire.

This contributed to the papacy’s reliance on the Frankish kingdom.

Daniel 11:31 — The abomination of desolation

This is a pivotal verse.

“And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength…”

Treiyer interprets this as the papal replacement of Christ’s heavenly priestly ministry with an earthly sacerdotal system.

In other words:

Christ’s heavenly priesthood → replaced/supplanted in popular understanding by an earthly priesthood.

He associates the “daily” with Christ’s continual heavenly intercession.

The papal system, in his interpretation, substitutes:

Christ’s heavenly mediation

with

priestly absolution/confessional mediation and the sacramental system.

Treiyer explicitly says this happens before the time of the end. He places the actual “time of the end” beginning at verse 40.

The 508–1798 period

This is where Treiyer’s interpretation becomes particularly important for understanding the rest of Daniel.

He sees the medieval church-state system as extending through the prophetic period represented by:

1260 years

and

1290 years.

For the 1290, he uses:

508 → 1798

He associates 508 with Clovis and the establishment of the Frankish church-state alliance, while 1798 marks the end of the papacy’s political authority.

Treiyer specifically says that the 1290-year period extends from 508 to 1798.

Daniel 11:32 — “Those who do wickedly against the covenant”

Treiyer sees the papacy using political manipulation and religious flattery to control rulers.

A major example is Clovis, the Frankish king.

The papacy and Frankish monarchy become partners in a political-religious system.

Treiyer sees France as particularly important because France becomes the papacy’s historic political ally—the “eldest daughter” of the church.

Daniel 11:33 — The persecuted faithful

Now the prophecy turns toward the people who resist Rome.

Treiyer connects this with:

Waldenses/Albigenses
Wycliffe
Huss
Luther
Protestant Reformers
other Bible-centered Christians

The persecuted people are progressively refined through suffering.

This is important because Treiyer doesn’t interpret the prophecy merely as a sequence of political rulers. God’s faithful people are the central human participants in the conflict.

Daniel 11:34 — “A little help”

Treiyer sees this as the providential preservation of the Protestant movement.

He mentions:

Protestant political alliances
resistance by European princes
conflicts that weakened the Catholic-Habsburg alliance
even the Ottoman threat, which sometimes diverted Catholic military attention.

He also sees the discovery and settlement of America as providential assistance to persecuted Christians.

This is where the United States begins to enter his larger prophetic picture.

But there is an important distinction:

Treiyer does not make the United States the King of the North or South in Daniel 11.

Rather, America provides a place of refuge for persecuted believers, which he connects with Revelation 12:16, where the earth helps the woman.

Daniel 11:35 — Refinement until the time of the end

Treiyer keeps this verse in the medieval period.

The faithful are:

persecuted → purified → made white.

He explicitly rejects interpreting the purification here as something that occurs only after the 1260 years.

He sees the persecution itself as the refining process.

Daniel 11:36 — The Papacy exalts itself

Here Treiyer becomes completely explicit:

King of the North = the Papacy.

He connects Daniel 11:36 with:

Daniel 7’s little horn
Daniel 8’s little horn
Revelation 13’s beast
2 Thessalonians 2’s “man of sin”

The common characteristic is self-exaltation above God.

Treiyer particularly emphasizes the papal claim to authority over God’s law.

He connects this with Daniel 7:25, especially the attempt to change the Sabbath commandment.

Daniel 11:37 — Exalting itself above God

Treiyer continues the papal identification.

He associates the verse with:

papal authority
clerical celibacy
suppression of dissent
persecution
elevation of human authority above Scripture.

He therefore sees verses 36–37 as another description of the medieval papal antichrist rather than a future individual ruler.

Daniel 11:38 — “The god of fortresses”

Treiyer interprets this as the papacy adopting and incorporating aspects of the imperial Roman religious system.

His basic idea is:

Pagan Imperial Rome → Christianized Imperial Rome → Papal Rome

The religious/political system of Imperial Rome is transferred into the medieval papal structure.

He connects this with Revelation 13:2–4, where the dragon gives the beast its power, throne, and authority.

Daniel 11:39 — Political power and wealth

The papacy becomes an international political power.

Treiyer points to:

kings being crowned by popes
papal territorial authority
political agreements
distribution of territory
papal influence over European rulers.

So the “King of the North” is not merely a theological institution.

It is a religious-political system exercising international authority.

Daniel 11:40 — THE GREAT TRANSITION

This is probably the single most important verse in Treiyer’s entire interpretation.

“At the time of the end shall the king of the south push/gore at him…”

Treiyer’s identification:

King of the North = Papacy/Babylon

King of the South = secularism/atheism

This is not ancient Egypt versus ancient Syria anymore.

Treiyer uses Revelation to establish the symbolic meaning:

Egypt = atheism/secularism

Babylon = apostate Christianity/Rome

He connects Daniel 11:40 with Revelation 11:7–8, where the two witnesses are killed in the symbolic city called “Sodom and Egypt.”

He then quotes Ellen White’s identification of Egypt’s spirit as atheism.

France becomes extremely important

For Treiyer, the French Revolution is the historical bridge between the medieval King of the North and the modern King of the South.

France becomes radically secular/atheistic during the Revolution.

Treiyer therefore sees the French Revolution as:

the first major historical manifestation of the King of the South in its end-time form.

And it attacks the papal system.

1798 — The deadly wound

This is where Treiyer’s interpretation connects Daniel 11 with Revelation 13.

In 1798, General Berthier entered Rome and took Pope Pius VI prisoner.

Treiyer interprets this as the political death wound of the papacy.

He connects it to:

Revelation 13:3 — “one of its heads seemed to have had a fatal wound.”

The important qualification is:

The papacy did not cease to exist.

Rather, its political sovereignty/authority was dramatically broken.

Treiyer says the papacy subsequently lost the political authority it had exercised during its medieval supremacy.

Why 1798 is “the time of the end”

This is central to his chronology.

Treiyer sees:

508 → 1798

as the 1290-year period.

And the 1260-year papal supremacy likewise terminates at the end of the eighteenth century.

Therefore:

1798 marks the beginning of “the time of the end.”

That is why he says Daniel 11:40 is not describing medieval events.

It describes the post-1798 confrontation.

The King of the South after 1798

Treiyer does not restrict the King of the South to revolutionary France.

France is the historical prototype.

The larger power is:

secularism/atheism

It subsequently appears through:

revolutionary secularism
philosophical atheism
communism
atheistic governments
secular political systems opposed to religious authority.

This interpretation is also reflected in the Adventist Biblical Research Institute’s discussion of Daniel 11, which describes the French revolutionary atheistic power as the King of the South and traces its later development through Marxism/communism.

Daniel 11:41 — The “Beautiful Land”

Now Treiyer moves from the confrontation between the two kings to the final religious crisis.

The “Beautiful Land” originally means Israel.

But under the New Testament symbolic framework, Treiyer says it becomes:

spiritual Israel

and ultimately:

the faithful end-time remnant / 144,000.

Thus the King of the North/Babylon eventually penetrates into the territory of God’s final people.

What happens to God’s people?

This is where the 144,000 enter the picture.

Treiyer explicitly identifies the 144,000 as:

the last remnant of spiritual Israel

who are sealed before Christ’s coming.

The final conflict therefore isn’t simply:

Catholics vs. atheists.

It becomes:

Babylon vs. God’s final faithful people.

Edom, Moab and Ammon

Treiyer does not interpret these primarily as modern Middle Eastern countries.

He treats them typologically.

They were relatives of Israel in ancient history.

In the final application they represent people/groups who are connected with God’s people but who escape Babylon’s complete control.

Thus not everyone outside the visible remnant necessarily falls under Babylon’s final control.

Daniel 11:42–43 — Egypt falls

This is where Treiyer’s two kings become especially clear.

King of the North/Babylon defeats King of the South/Egypt.

In the final application:

Papacy/religious Babylon gains supremacy over secularism.

Treiyer interprets the “treasures of Egypt” as the political and economic resources of secular governments becoming available to the religious power.

He connects this directly to Revelation 13.

The final religious system obtains cooperation from secular governments.

The Sunday-law connection

This is one of Treiyer’s most explicit end-time applications.

He interprets the final religious law as:

Sunday legislation

because, in his Adventist framework, Sunday observance represents the authority of Rome in opposition to the biblical seventh-day Sabbath.

He says secular governments will cooperate with the papacy in enforcing this religious requirement.

The result is the mark of the beast crisis described in Revelation 13.

He makes an interesting distinction:

Some receive the mark in the forehead — intellectual/voluntary acceptance.
Others receive it in the hand — outward compliance without genuine conviction.

Where does the United States fit?

This is worth emphasizing because you specifically asked about America.

Treiyer does NOT identify the United States as the King of the South.

Instead, the U.S. fits primarily into the Revelation 13/12 framework.

America originally functions as a place of religious liberty and refuge.

Treiyer connects America’s role to Revelation 12:16:

the earth helps the woman.

But eventually, in the broader Revelation 13 scenario, the second beast causes the world to make an image to the first beast and ultimately supports enforcement of the beast’s authority.

Therefore his overall prophetic picture is:

Europe/Rome → Papacy

France/Revolution → secularism

America → initially religious liberty/refuge, eventually a major participant in the final image-to-the-beast crisis.

That last element is derived principally from his Revelation framework rather than being a direct identification of the U.S. in Daniel 11:40–45.

Daniel 11:44 — “News from the east and north”

Now the story takes a dramatic turn.

The King of the North has defeated secularism and established enormous religious-political authority.

But then:

“tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him.”

Treiyer identifies this with the Three Angels’ Messages and the final proclamation of the Gospel.

The announcement includes:

“Babylon is fallen.”

The faithful proclaim that Babylon’s kingdom is collapsing.

That message terrifies Babylon.

Why “east”?

Treiyer connects the east with the coming of Christ.

He makes a direct connection:

Cyrus from the east → liberation of Israel

becomes a type of:

Christ from the east → liberation of God’s people.

This is also why he connects Daniel 11 with Revelation 16:12:

the Euphrates dries up “to prepare the way for the kings from the East.”

Treiyer explicitly identifies these kings from the East as:

Christ and His angels.

The drying of the Euphrates

This is a major part of Treiyer’s Daniel-Revelation synthesis.

Ancient Babylon fell when:

Cyrus diverted the Euphrates.

Therefore:

ancient Babylon’s Euphrates dries up → Babylon falls.

The final counterpart is:

spiritual Babylon’s support dries up → Babylon falls.

Treiyer interprets the Euphrates symbolically as the popular support of Babylon.

When the peoples who have supported Babylon withdraw their support, Babylon becomes vulnerable to destruction.

Daniel 11:45 — Babylon’s final position

This is one of Treiyer’s strongest statements.

“He shall plant the tents of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain…”

Treiyer says:

“Between the seas” = Palestine/Israel geographically

but under the New Testament symbolic interpretation:

“Glorious Holy Mountain” = God’s spiritual Israel.

And that spiritual Israel is represented by:

the 144,000.

Thus the papal/Babylon power attempts to establish itself in the midst of God’s final people.

Then Babylon comes to its end

Daniel 11:45 ends:

“Yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.”

Treiyer connects this with the seven last plagues.

Babylon has reached the height of its power, but suddenly its support collapses.

The people who had supported the system recognize that they have been deceived.

Treiyer connects this with Revelation 16–18 and Ellen White’s description of the collapse of Babylon.

Daniel 12:1 — Michael stands up

This is the climax.

“And at that time shall Michael stand up…”

Treiyer’s identification is unequivocal:

Michael = Christ.

He connects Michael with:

the Son of God in Daniel 3
the Son of Man in Daniel 7
the Prince of the host in Daniel 8
Michael in Daniel 10
Michael in Daniel 12.

But Treiyer makes a fascinating sanctuary connection.

Michael first “stands” in the heavenly court.

He has been interceding for His people.

Then:

Michael stands up and the time of intercession closes.

And finally:

Christ comes to deliver His people.

Thus Daniel 12:1 encompasses the transition from:

investigative/judgment ministry → close of probation → time of trouble → Second Coming.

The “time of trouble”

Treiyer identifies Daniel 12:1’s unparalleled time of trouble with the final crisis described in Revelation.

God’s people are surrounded by the powers allied with Babylon.

But those whose names are written in the book are delivered.

This is the ultimate purpose of the prophecy:

God does not abandon His people when Babylon reaches its greatest apparent power.

The Second Coming

Treiyer’s final sequence is:

Babylon rises

↓

Secularism is defeated

↓

Religious/political union dominates

↓

Sunday enforcement / mark-of-the-beast crisis

↓

144,000 sealed

↓

Three Angels’ Messages announce Babylon’s fall

↓

Babylon’s popular support collapses

↓

Euphrates dries up

↓

Michael stands up

↓

Time of trouble

↓

Christ and His angels come from the East

↓

Babylon and the allied powers are destroyed

↓

God’s people are delivered

↓

Resurrection

↓

Kingdom of Christ

Treiyer explicitly describes the final three-way conflict as:

Secular/atheistic powers
Religious/clerical powers represented by Babylon
Michael/Christ and His heavenly forces

The entire prophecy in one chart

Daniel	Treiyer’s identification	Historical/prophetic significance
11:20	Augustus	Roman imperial succession
11:21	Tiberius	Roman imperial power
11:22	Christ	“Prince of the Covenant” crucified
11:23–27	Constantine/Licinius and Christianized Rome	Christianity enters imperial politics
11:28–30	Papal Rome developing	Church-state power
11:31	Papal system	Sanctuary/priestly ministry corrupted
11:32–35	Medieval papacy vs. faithful Christians	Persecution and Reformation
11:36–39	Papacy	Self-exaltation and political-religious authority
11:40	Papacy vs. secularism	Time of the end begins
11:40 South	Atheism/secularism	France → later communism/secularism
11:40 North	Papacy/Babylon	Religious response to secularism
11:41	God’s spiritual Israel	Final remnant/144,000
11:42–43	Babylon overcomes secular powers	Religious-political union
11:44	Three Angels’ Messages	Announcement of Babylon’s fall
11:44 East	Christ	Coming King
11:45	Babylon enters final conflict with God’s people	Final confrontation
12:1	Michael = Christ	Close of probation, time of trouble, deliverance
12:2	Resurrection	Eternal life and final judgment

The underlying chart is essentially Treiyer’s own.

One especially important insight

Treiyer’s interpretation is not simply “Daniel 11 predicts the papacy.”

It is more sophisticated than that.

His basic prophetic equation is:

Ancient Babylon

vs.

Ancient Egypt

becomes prophetically:

Babylon = apostate religious Rome