bS \55S .4 .an Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/inaroundbookofdaOObout Frontispiece PLAN OF 15ABYLON i kom Ko;. dewey’s “ excavations at babyi.on “ In and around the Book of Daniel IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL BY CHARLES BOUTFLOWER, M.A. LATE VICAR OF TERLING, ESSEX PREFACE BY THEOPHILUS G. PINCHES, LL.D., M.R.A.S. WITH 15 ILLUSTRATIONS LONDON SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE NEW YORK AND TORONTO : THE MACMILLAN CO i923 PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN PREFACE Christian believers may be divided into two classes — those who believe without interesting themselves greatly in the source of their belief and the land which gave it birth, and those for whom the Semitic east, and especially our Saviour’s native land, are the abode of romance and delight. It was the dwelling-place of Abraham and the Patriarchs; and the home of the Jews after the Exodus, when the judges ruled and later the kings held sway. In these latter days, too, Assyria and Babylonia came upon the scene, and we are shown the ways of a still more romantic East — in the case of Babylonia, moreover, an earlier home of the Hebrews, as well as a later one, stands revealed. Owing to these changes, doubtless, the Book of Daniel has always attracted considerable attention among all classes of students, from the most orthodox to those prominent in the opposite camp ; and it may also be said that it has attracted not a little attention from those who would banish Christianity and a belief in God entirely from the world. And this is not to be wondered at, especially when we read the well-reasoned and instructive pages which the Bev. Charles Boutflower here presents to us. If one might in this place make a parallel, the Book of Daniel is in a like case to the Book of Jonah in the matter of historical difficulties. But such difficulties as these are not seldom met with in the Old Testament. Earliest of all is the reference to Nimrod in Gen. x. 10. It is a name which is not found in the records of Babylonia and Assyria, but which we have nevertheless to explain. After this comes the question of the battle of the four kings against five in Gen. xiv., for now we have the complete list of the year-dates of Hammurabi, the king who is apparently to be identified with Amraphel, and among them there is no record of an expedition to the Dead Sea region or to any of the lands adjacent thereto. Still later on there is the question of Cushan-rishathaim, king of Mesopotamia (Aram-Naharaim), whose name has still to be discovered or identified. And when we come to the time of Hezekiah, we are confronted with the doubt whether Sennacherib of Assyria made two expeditions against Judah and Jerusalem, or only one. And iii IV PREFACE so the seeming discrepancies between the compiled history con¬ tained in the Old Testament and the contemporary documents of the Assyrians and the Babylonians goes on. But of all the Old Testament books which contain problems requiring solution, none would seem to surpass in importance the Book of Daniel. There is not only in it the question of the status of the Israelites who were captives at Babylon, and their treat¬ ment at the hands of their captors, but the reader is also faced by numerous historical questions due to events belonging to the period of their captivity. Did Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, really go mad, and did he, after regaining his reason, become a worshipper of the God of the Hebrews? Was Belshazzar, son of Nabonidus, really the last native king of Babylon, and if so, how is it that Nebuchadrezzar, in Daniel, is stated to have been his father ? Both these assertions are against the testimony of the Babylonian contemporary records, and need explanation — how are they to be explained ? As to Daniel being appointed the third ruler in the kingdom, that is bound up with the latter of these two questions, and has an important bearing upon it. Of equal difficulty, and of equal importance, is the identity of Darius the Median. Here we are again faced by a ruler whose name is absent from the inscriptions and chronological lists — neither the Babylonians nor the Greek historians know anything of him, and the only personage either in the Babylonian Chronicle or in Xenophon “ receiving the kingdom ” (instead of Cyrus, the conqueror of Babylonia) from the last of the native rulers, was Gobryas, whom the Babylonians called Gubar u or Ugbaru (variant spellings which suggest the pronunciation G’baru). In no case, however, is he called Darius, which, moreover, is doubtfully a Median name. As to his nationality, the Babylonians describe Gubaru as being of Gutium, a mountainous district identified with “ old Media,” and the Arabic Jebel Judi. All the identifi¬ cations, however, are learnedly discussed by the author of this book, and will not fail to provide the reader with the needful material for deciding the question for himself. Incidentally he will acquire much information concerning many other potentates of those ancient days — all of them historical personages and men of renown. In the end the reader will probably come to the conclusion that there is no more interesting examination of the Book of Daniel than the present work. Not only are the great problems contained in the Book examined and dealt with in the light of the records accessible to the author, but likewise all the lesser problems which the Hebrew record contains. In this book the reader will find explanations of all Daniel’s prophetic dreams, and much strange information thereon is brought to light. His PREFACE v remarks upon the difference between Babylonians and Chaldeans are by no means to be neglected, though many an ethnic problem still remains to be solved. Whatever may have been said against it, and however much the Book of Daniel may have been, and may still be, criticised, it remains a most valuable record dealing with a great and proud people, who thought that they had a right to be proud. Was not their land the place of the earthly Paradise, and were not their priests every one of them princes, steeped in celestial lore ? Moreover, was not all the wisdom of the old Sumerians and Akkadians, reaching back through untold ages, when the god of wisdom came forth from the sea to teach them the arts and the things which a nation favoured by the gods ought to know — was not all this wisdom theirs ? Daniel and his contemporaries were eye-witnesses of the last glories of Babylon, and also of the assumption of its dominion by a foreign power — that of Persia, the most beneficent rule in the world. We have still to learn what moved the Babylonians to accept it, but we may suppose that there was a feeling of great discontent in the country, and that the people thought that they could not do better than accept this foreign rule. If, however, they expected to retain their proud position in the world, and be considered, as of old, as one of the great nations, they were undeceived before many decades had passed. The Persians were not a nation whose rulers could be absorbed, as were absorbed the Amorites, the Kassites, and the Elamites of the dynasty of Larsa, into the Babylonian empire. “ The beauty of the Chaldees' excellency,” therefore, continued to decline until Babylon became the desolation which it is at the present day. As in the case of the Book of Jonah, the critics attack the Book of Daniel, aiming, through them, their shafts at the Churches, but both books remain among the most important in the Old Testament, for both contain pictures of phases of Eastern life and teaching not to be found elsewhere. THEOPHILUS G. PINCHES. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAOS Chronological Tables ... ... ... ... xv CHAPTER I: Introduction ... ... ... ... 1 Statement of the two views with respect to the Book of Daniel : the orthodox and the critical — The critics, guided by chap, xi., do great violence to the rest of the Book — Dr. Wright’s explanation of that c hapter a concession, but not improbable — Interpolation of Holy Scrip¬ ture as witnessed by the Targums — The visions of Daniel only to be made clear by their fulfilment — Nevertheless this Book to engage the attention of many, and further light promised. CHAPTER II: The Four Kingdoms ... ... ... 13 The Grecian and the Roman scheme — Chaps, vii. and viii. not parallels — A curious piece of criticism — The “ little horn ” of vii. 8 not identical with that of viii. 9 — The “ ten horns ” wrongly treated by the critics — Visions of chaps, vii. and viii. contrasted — Difficulty presented by the words “ another kingdom inferior to thee ” — Justification of a new rendering — Daniel’s silence as to the second kingdom — Why the Grecian scheme first found favour — Additional Note on Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz. CHAPTER III : The Gold, the Silver, the Brass, and the Iron ... ... ... ... ... 24 Hint from Josephus as to the meaning of the metals — Their order con¬ sidered — Babylon the golden kingdom, as testified by Herodotus and the inscriptions — Persia the silver or monied kingdom — Wealth the source of its strength — Brass a picture of the Grecian arms — “ Brazen men from the sea ” — The leopard of chap. vii. symbolises the rapid advance of Alexander — An argument from the Greek lexicon — With the rise of the Roman power brass gives place to iron— The Roman kingdom pictured by the fourth beast of chap. vii. — Strength of the Roman kingdom proved by its duration — Suitability of the metals from the mythological standpoint. CHAPTER IY : The Chaldeans op the Book of Daniel 35 The “ Chaldeans ” one proof of the authenticity of this Book — The word not used as in Juvenal — Its double meaning — Home of the Kaldu — “ Nebuchadnezzar the Chaldean” — His father drives out the Assyrians and founds a Chaldean dynasty at Babylon — A feature of Chaldean vi TABLE OF CONTENTS throne-names — “ The Chaldeans ” not identical with the Babylonians — Herodotus as to the Chaldean priesthood of Bel — Testimonyi'of Dio¬ dorus Siculus confirmed by an inscription of Nabopolassar — Strange absence of the name in Babylonian inscriptions — A possible explanation — An enlightening tablet of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar — High social position of “ the Chaldeans ” — Correct estimate of them?|formed by Delattre. CHAPTER V : The Great Mountain ... Shadu Babu, “ The Great Mountain,” originally a title of En-lil of Nippur, the chief of the gods — His supremacy and title presently trans¬ ferred to Merodach of Babylon — The Aramaic Dhur Rabh of Dan. ii. 35 the exact equivalent of the Babylonian Shadu Babu — How a Baby¬ lonian audience would understand Daniel’s interpretation of the king’s dream — En-lil the storm-god — His name signifies “ lord of the wind ” — In this respect also he is superseded by Merodach— This throws further light on the meaning of the dream — The six mountains of the Book of Enoch suggested by Dan. ii. — How they are to be understood — Immense impression made on Nebuchadnezzar by the discovery and interpreta¬ tion of his dream — Consequent fame of Daniel as attested by Ezekiel. CHAPTER VI: The Messianic Kingdom Striking reference in the Similitudes of Enoch to the vision of Dan. vii. 13, 14 — Growth of Messianic doctrine before the birth of Christ — Dan. vii. 13, 14 interpreted by our Lord and His contemporaries as in the Similitudes — Strange interpretation offered by the critics — Driver’s argument refuted by the fact that “ the saints ” belong to the vision and not merely to its interpretation — Further refutation obtained by an analysis of the chapter — Clear view of the author of the Similitudes — The critics blinded by their low estimate of Daniel’s Book — A resem¬ blance between the Messianic kingdom and the first of the four king¬ doms — Note on the date of the Similitudes. CHAPTER VII: The Royal Builder ... The legend of Megasthenes — Its connection with the narrative of Dan. iv. — The king walking upon his palace, possibly in the Hanging Gardens — Bemarkable structure discovered by Koldewey — Good view of Babylon obtainable therefrom — Nebuchadnezzar one of the greatest builders — The building inscriptions — How they can be arranged in chronological order — Some features of the longer inscriptions — A fragment from the annals — Babylon Nebuchadnezzar’s only plaoe of residence — Excava¬ tion of the Old Palace rebuilt by him — New palace to the north erected in fifteen days — The rampart of “mighty stones” — The two palaces formed into one acropolis represented by the Kasr mound — A third palace at the north angle of the outer wall of Babylon represented by the mound Babil — The temple of Merodach buried in the mound Amran — The Hanging Gardens the centre of the whole — From this point, close to the Ishtar Gate, may have been uttered the proud boast of Dan. iv. 30. • • VII PAGB 45 55 65 TABLE OF CONTENTS • • • vui PAGE CHAPTER VIII: The Royal Wood-cutter ... ... 78 Light thrown by the inscriptions on the narrative of Dan. iv. — Nebu¬ chadnezzar makes Babylon the centre of empire — “ Under her ever¬ lasting shadow have I gathered all men in peace ” — The vision of the great tree an exact picture of the king’s idea of empire — -Nebuchad¬ nezzar’s love for the Lebanon — The Wady Brissa Inscription — Its contents described — Conquest of the Lebanon — Royal visits to the cedar forest — The king cuts down trees with his own hand — Vivid light thrown on Hab. ii. — Tyre a competitor for the Lebanon — Strategic position of Riblah — Typical significance of the cedar — The dream of Dan. iv. genuine — “ The basest of men” explained by an inscription of Nabopolassar — This one of the strongest proofs of the authenticity of the Book of Daniel. CHAPTER IX: The Personality op Nebuchadnezzar ... 92 Different character of the royal inscriptions of Assyria and Babylonia — The personality of the monarch sometimes visible in the inscriptions of the Neo-Babylonian kings — This, in Nebuchadnezzar’s case, a strong confirmation of] the authenticity of the Book of Daniel — Monotheistic tendency in the Babylonian religion due originally to the supremacy of En-lil of Nippur — That supremacy transferred to Merodach — The Enlil- ship of Merodach strongly emphasised in passages of the India House Inscription — In such passages can be traced the pen of Nebuchadnezzar — Increasing monotheism of this king in his later years — How it was possible for him to acknowledge the supremacy of the God of Israel — Nabopolassar ’s exaltation of Shamash — Nabonidus’ devotion to Sin and Shamash — Poetic style of Nebuchadnezzar in narrative as well as in hymns of praise — An echo of this in the Book of Daniel — Would an author of the Maccabean age write thus ? CHAPTER X: The Legend op Megasthenes ... ... 105 Points of contact between the legend and the narrative of Dan. iv. — The legend, though in a Greek dress, belongs to the early Persian period — Its authors the Chaldean priests—Their hatred to Nabonidus, whose training inclined him to Sin rather than to Merodach — History of his reign — Though united in their hatred to Nabonidus the priest¬ hood are divided over Cyrus — The Cylinder of Cyrus — Its language respecting Cyrus shows an acquaintance with the Book of Isaiah, and is in strong contrast to the contempt expressed in the legend — Light thrown by the Book of Daniel on this division of opinion in the priest- hood—The true story of Dan. iv. turned into a legend bewrailing the departed Nebuchadnezzar and crediting him with the gift of prophecy — Note on an inscription by the father of Nabonidus. CHAPTER XI: Belshazzar ... ... ... ... 114 Belshazzar a distinctly historical personage — Conjecture as to his age — Trained in the cult of Sin, Shamash, and Anunit — Early brought into connection with the court of Nebuchadnezzar — His relation to that TABLE OF CONTENTS ix PAGE king merely a legal one, arising ont of the anxiety of his father Naboni- dus to legitimise his claim — The “ queen ” of Dan. v. 10 probably the widow of Nebuchadnezzar — Belshazzar in what sense king — Important tablet from Erech, showing him to have been associated with his father during part of the reign of Nabonidus — Hence the explanation of his “ first ” and “ third ” years — Why his name is not found in the dating of the contract tablets — His position as head of the nobility. CHAPTER XII: The Fall of Babylon ... ... 121 Prophecy of Jer. chaps. 1., li. — Its fulfilment as recorded in Dan. v. as well as in the pages of Herodotus and Xenophon — Points of agreement between the narrative in Daniel and those of the two Greek writers form a voucher for the truth of all three records, no less than for the genuineness of the prophecy — The native records on the Annalistic Tablet and the Cylinder of Cyrus — Points of agreement with Dan. v. and with the statements of Herodotus and Xenophon — A seeming difference explained by the light of the contract tablets — Note on Cyrus’ occupation of Babylon. CHAPTER XIII : The Handwriting on the Wall ... 133 Discovery of the throne-room of the Babylonian kings — Belshazzar’s feast pictured — His knowledge at first hand of Nebuchadnezzar’s mad¬ ness — The proffered rewards — Daniel’s stern address — The four mystic words, probably written in Aramaic and in alphabetic characters — Their seeming sense nonsense, but significant of some hidden meaning — “ The tablets of fate ” explain the king’s alarm — Daniel’s interpreta¬ tion confirms his forebodings — The closing scene. CHAPTER XIV : Darius the Mede ... ... ... 142 Darius the great historical crux of this Book — In what sense he “received the kingdom ” — The six proposed identifications of Darius reduced to two — The claim of Gobryas considered — Preference given to Cambyses the son of Cyrus — Evidence from the Annalistic Tablet that Cyrus appointed Cambyses to succeed Belshazzar — Evidence from the contract tablets that for some ten months in the year after the capture of Babylon Cambyses bore the title “ King of Babylon,” his father being styled “King of the Countries” — The two titles point to a distribution of authority — Babylon formed into a sub-kingdom — Cambyses in what sense a Mede and why so called — Josephus’ statement that Darius the Mede “ had another name among the Greeks ” — Argument to show that this name was Cambyses — “Darius” an appellative rather than a proper name — The “ Ahasuerus ” of Dan. ix. 1 probably to be identified with Cyaxeres. CHAPTER XV : Darius the Mede — continued ... ... 156 Age of Darius not given in the LXX — If the son of Amytis, the daughter of Astyages, he might be twelve years old when appointed king of Babylon — Argument to show that 12, not 62, is the oorrect X TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE reading in Dan. v. 31 — Letters of the alphabet early used for numbers — Close resemblance about 500 B.C. between the letters which stand for 10 and 60 — A 10 thus mistaken for 60 in Isa. vii. 8 — Attempt to explain the remarkable reading of the LXX — The story of Dan. vi. the best proof of the youthful age of Darius — Cambyses not altogether bad — His kindness to the Jews in Egypt, as related in the letter from Elephantine, possibly to be explained by the narrative of Dan. vi. — The “ satraps ” of Dan. vi. 1, 2 — Reply to Charles’ remarks on the title, sovereignty, and power ascribed to Darius — Possible extent of his kingdom — Explanation of the imperial style of his decree — That style justified in the light of the inscription on the Cyrus Cylinder — Dan. vi. helps to explain the removal of iCambyses:’ from the throne of Babylon — Note on the letters Samekh and Yod. CHAPTER XVI: The Evangelic Peophecy ... ... 168 Immense gulf between the critical and the orthodox interpretations — Statement of the traditional view and of the critical — Free treatment of Dan. ix. 24-27 at the hands of the LXX translator shown by placing a translation of the LXX side by side with the R.V. — Examination of the mutilation of the passage by the LXX and the reason thereof explained — The action of the LXX a strong proof that the prophecy does not refer to the Maccabean crisis — Interpretation of the passage offered by the critics involves a glaring chronological error in a prophecy remarkable for its exact numbers — Supposed Jewish ignorance of the chronology of the Persian period shown to be utterly unfounded — The attempt of the critics as complete a failure as that of the LXX. CHAPTER XVII : The Evangelic Peophecy — continued ... 179 Short summary of the traditional interpretation of Dan. ix. 24-27 — Occasion of the vision — The seer overcome with the enormity of the national sin — His earnest pleadings with God for the Holy City and the Chosen People — The speedy answer — Gabriel’s kindly greeting — Expan¬ sion of the seventy years into seventy weeks of years — The order of the vision follows the order of Daniel’s prayer ; the atonement for sin standing first — The six clauses of verse 24 — Translation of verses 25-27 — Punctuation of verse 25 in the A.Y. explained and defended — Terminus a quo of the prophecy — The “ troublous times ’’—Public appearance of the Messiah at the end of the sixty-nine weeks — “ Prince Messiah ” a compound title — The title Messiah, whence taken — Like Tsemach in Zech. iii. 8, here used as a proper name — Statements con¬ cerning Messiah’s death. CHAPTER XVIII: The Evangelic Peophecy — continued... 194 “The coming Prince ” identified with “Prince Messiah” — The term usually points to Christ coming to judgment — Stier on Matt. xxli. 7 — Dan. ix. 26b describes the judgment entailed by the crime of 26a — The Prince makeB a firm covenant with his subjects during the seventieth week, which ends with the death of Stephen — Noticeable change of TABLE OF CONTENTS xi PAGE popular feeling towards Christianity after that event — Jerusalem’s day of grace extends to the close of the seventieth week ; but with Messiah’s death in the middle of that week the Jewish sacrifices cease in God’s sight — The “ desolator ” of verse 27 not to be confounded with “ the people of the coming Prince ” of verse 26 — The expression points to the Zealots — Their atrocities as described by Josephus — The wrath poured out on the desolator. CHAPTER XIX : Chronology op the Seventieth Week 206 The prophecy not concerned with literal days and weeks, but only with prophetic year-days — Three independent calculations which point to A.D. 26 as the year in which Messiah was proclaimed present among His people — The length of Christ’s earthly ministry points to A.D. 29-30, the fourth “ day ” of the seventieth “ week,” as the year in which He suffered — Ramsay places the Crucifixion in A.D. 30, and the death of Stephen in A.D. 33 — These two dates complete the chronology of the seventieth week — For the glory of “ Prince Messiah ” as well as to take in Israel’s day of grace the prophecy is carried down to that point at which the Messianic kingdom is proclaimed to the Gentile world. CHAPTER XX : On the Scenes op the Two Visions CONCERNING THE JEWISH CHURCH ... ... 212 Close connection of the visions in chaps, viii. and x.-xii. — Why the earlier vision of chap. vii. was shown to Daniel on the shore of “ the great sea ” — Why these more contracted visions on the banks of the Ulai and the Hiddekel — Daniel present there only in spirit — Physical features of Elam— Elam in the Assyrian period — Outlives Assyria — Probable story of her downfall — Western Elam, including Shushan, absorbed into the Babylonian Empire — Shushan later the favourite residence of the Persian kings — The fortress-palace at Shushan as pictured on a bas-relief — The canal Ulai symbolic of the wealth of the Persian kingdom — The Medo-Persian ram stands in front of this canal to guard his treasures — The fabulous wealth captured by Alexander at Shushan — God’s voice heard between the banks of the Ulai — The Hiddekel, or Tigris, styled in chap. x. “the great river,” a name elsewhere only bestowed on the Euphrates — The broad, still Ulai suggestive of commerce ; the deep, rapid Tigris of the onrush of war — Why the vision of chaps, x.-xii. was shown by the Tigris rather than by the Euphrates or Orontes— The word for “ river ” in xii. 5, elsewhere used only of the Nile — The two names thus bestowed on the Tigris are suggestive of an overwhelming tyranny, a Babylon and Egypt combined, before which Judah must needs go under ; but a Divine Person standing above the waters of the river is on her side — This Person is the Christ who walked on the waters of the Sea of Galilee — Note on the site of the ancient Shushan and the reputed tomb of Daniel. CHAPTER XXI: The Language Evidence ... ... 226 Driver’s famous verdict modified by its author — The Book of Daniel probably written in Aramaio — Historic facts concerning the Arameans — Xll TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Babylonia ringed round with Aramean tribes — Aramaic the language of diplomacy and commerce — Not surprising that Daniel wrote in that language — Aramaic inscriptions — Discoveries made at Elephantine — The Elephantine legal documents commence about sixty-five years after the time of Daniel — The Elephantine letter of 408 B.C. — Its purport — English translation with notes — Grammar and syntax of the letter the same as that of the Aramaic of Daniel — A noticeable difference in one respect — How explained — “Eastern” and “Western Aramaic” mis¬ nomers — The Aramaic of Daniel suggests that the Book was written in Babylonia rather than in Palestine. CHAPTER XXII: Evidence of the Eoeeign Words ... 241 The foreign words in the Book of Daniel a valuable evidence as to its authenticity — Driver’s verdict on the Old Persian words loses sight of some important facts — Daniel’s position well explains his use of such words — The Aramaic in close contact with the Old Persian for at least two centuries before the time of Daniel — Character of the majority of the Old Persian words used — How the others are to be accounted for — Daniel written in the early Persian period — The Old Persian words stitch the two parts of the Book together — Th e fewness of the Greek words fatal to the theory that the Book was written in 165 B.C. — Greek musical instruments naturally bore Greek names — Contact between the Assyrians amd the Greeks in the latter half of the eighth and the earlier half of the seventh centuries B.C. — Sennacherib, for the sake of commerce with the West, keeps open the “ Cilician Road ” in 698 B.C. — Traces of Greek architecture in Assyria and Ararat in the time of Sargon II. — Striking Greek decorations on the facade of Nebu¬ chadnezzar’s palace — The artists probably Greek captives brought from Egypt — The Nebuchadnezzar cameo — Greek soldiers in the Babylonian army — The musical instruments probably from Asiatic Greece— Answer to the objection that two of the Greek words do not occur in classical Greek till long after the time of Daniel — Greek instruments suit the tastes of the reigning monarch — Assyro-Babylonian elements in the Book of Daniel — The foreign words a voucher for the period at which the Book was written — Light thrown by them on the region in which it was written, and on the person of the writer — Appendices : I. On the Old Persian Words ; II. On the Assyro-Babylonian Words. CHAPTER XXIII: The Book of Daniel and the Jewish Apocalypses ... ... ... ... ... 268 The Book of Enoch the most famous of the Apocalypses — Driver’s description of a Jewish apocalypse — The pseudonymous character of these works, how to be accounted for — The Book of Daniel classed by the critics with the Apocalypses— The idea refuted (i) by the absence in this Book of any plain connecting link with the Old Testament mention of the hero whose name it bears ; (ii; but still more evidently by the writer’s perfect acquaintance with Babylonian history and the peculiar linguistic features of his work— Cause for thankfulness to God suggested by these facts. TABLE OF CONTENTS xm CHAPTER XXIY : On the Position of the Book Daniel in the Canon of the Old Testament of PAGE 276 Little known about the formation of the Canon — The present position of Daniel in the Canon not its original position — The number of the Old Testament books indicated in 2 Esdras siv. — The threefold division referred to Luke xxiv. 44, and first mentioned in the prologue to Eccle- siasticus — The Palestinian and Talmudic Canons — Two statements from Josephus showing that in his day Daniel was placed in the Prophets — Witness of Melito and Origen to the same effect — In Jerome’s day Daniel is found in the Hagiographa — Possible reason for this change — • Surprise of Jerome at the position of the Book — The Book depreciated by its new position— Bearing of the above facts on Matt, xxiii. 35 — The argument clenched — “ The books ” in Dan. ix. 2 to be referred, not to a collection of sacred books, but to the writings of Jeremiah CHAPTER XXV: The Testimony of Christ The view held by Christ, if He be regarded merely as a human teacher steeped in Old Testament lore, demands nevertheless the consideration of doubters — The Book of Daniel treated by Him with special honour — Echoes of this Book in the Revelation — The Revelation throws light on the appearances of Christ in the visions shown to Daniel — It also helps to identify Daniel’s Fourth Kingdom with Rome, pagan and papal — That criticism which is higher than Christ must be looked upon as coming from beneath. 286 Additional Note 294 Indexes 297 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FACING PAGE Plan of Babylon ... . Frontispiece From Koldewey1 s “ Excavations at Babylon.” Principal Citadel op Babylon, built by Nebuchadnezzar . . 50 Koldewey, Pig. 98. Plan op Eastern section op the Southern Citadel, showing the POSITION OP THE HANGING GARDENS . Koldewey, Fig. 44. Stone Wall op Northern Citadel, built by Nebuchadnezzar Koldewey, Fig. 110. The Ishtar Gate . Koldewey, Fig. 24. The India House Inscription . 68 n 76 96 Cylinder of Nabonidus, inscribed with a Prayer in behalp op his son Belshazzar . 114 British Museum. Cylinder op Cyrus, with an Inscription describing his Capture op Babylon . . . . ... ... 128 British Museum. Plan op the Central Part op the Southern Citadel, showing the Throne-room op the Neo-Babylonian Kings . 134 Koldewey, Fig. 63. The Teima Stone . „ . 158 Decoration op the Facade op the Throne-room at Babylon, in the so-called Ionic Style . 248 Koldewey, Fig. 64. Gem in the Museum at the Hague, with an Inscription op Nebu¬ chadnezzar . 250 Cameo op Nebuchadnezzar now in the Museum at Florence . 250 Head op Shabitoku ... . . . 252 “ Passing of the Empires,” p. 360. Funerary Stele op a Lycaonian Soldier built into the S. Wall op Konieh, the Ancient Iconitjm . 252 Le win’s “ Life and Epistles of St. Paul," Vol. I. p. 146. TABLE I Chronology of the New Babylonian Empire 626 B.C. Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, on the death of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria. 614 B.C. Nineveh besieged by Cyaxares of Media. 612 B.C. Fall of Nineveh before the combined attack of Medes, Babylonians, and Scythians. 610 B.C. Overthrow at Haran by an army of Babylonians and Scythians of the last vestiges of the kingdom of Assyria. 608 B.C. Pharaoh Necho slays Josiah at Megiddo, defeats Babylon at Carchemish ; and returning, places Jehoiakim on the throne of Judah in place of Jehoahaz. 605 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar’s first visit to Jerusalem. After defeating Necho at Carchemish, he presses on through Judah, and invades Egypt ; then, hearing of the death of his father Nabopolassar, returns in haste across the desert to Babylon to receive the crown. Daniel and his friends brought to Babylon, along with other captives, Jewish, Syrian, Phoenician, Egyptian, and of “the nations belonging to Egypt ” : Josephus c. Apion , i. 19. 605-600 B.C. Early inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar, telling of recent conflicts. 603 B.C. Daniel recovers and interprets the king’s dream : Dan. ii. 1. 600-593 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar rebuilds numerous temples, beginning with the completion of the temple-tower at Babylon and the rebuilding at Larsa of the temple of the Sun, the foundations of which had been swept bare by the winds. 597 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar’s second visit to Jerusalem: Zedekiah appointed to succeed Jehoiachin. On his way thither he cuts down cedars in the Lebanon. 594 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar summons Zedekiah to Babylon : Jer. li. 59. 592 B.C. Ezekiel’s first mention of Daniel : chap. xiv. 14, 20. 588 B.C. The Babylonian army pass through the Lebanon : Wady Brissa Inscription A cut. Cedars cut down and brought into Babylon by the Arakhtu canal between 588 and 586 B.C. XV XVI TABLES 587 B.C. January. Siege of Jerusalem begins: 2 Kings xxv. 1. Ezekiel’s second mention of Daniel : chap, xxviii. 3. In this year, according to the LXX and Peshitto, the golden image of Dan. iii. was set up. 586 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar’s third visit to Jerusalem ; establishes his headquarters at Biblah in Hamath. Wady Brissa Inscription B cut. The city falls in July ; after which the siege of Tyre begins. 573 B.C. Tyre taken after a thirteen years’ siege : Ezek. xxix. 17-20. 568 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar invades Egypt and encounters Amasis (fragment of the Annals). 562 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar dies, and is succeeded by his son Evil- merodach ( = Amel-Marduk, “servant of Merodach ”). 560 B.C. Neriglissar (=Nergal-shar-utsur, “ Nergal protect the king ”), son-in-law of Nebuchadnezzar, succeeds Evil-merodach. 556 B.C. Labashi-Marduk, son of Neriglissar, reigns three months, and is succeeded by a usurper Nabonidus. Nabonidus, writing of the events of this year, mentions Cyrus as “ king of Anshan,” and calls him “ Merodach’s little servant.” 553 B.C. The Median army deliver up Astyages to Cyrus, who after spoiling Ecbatana returns to Anshan. 549 B.C. Belshazzar, son of Nabonidus, in command of the Baby¬ lonian army. 547 B.C. Cyrus called “ king of Persia” for the first time. 539 B.C. Babylon taken by Cyrus. Nabonidus captured by Cyrus. Belshazzar slain in a night attack on the palace. 538 B.C. First year of Cyrus. Proclamation for the return of the Jews. Cambyses “king of Babylon” for nine months from the beginning of the year. 536 B.C. Third year of Cyrus ; date of Daniel’s latest vision : chap. x. 1. TABLE II To show the wide diffusion of the Arameans, and their contact with Median tribes speaking the Old Persian some WO years before the probable date of the Booh of Daniel. 1650 B.C. Agum-kakrimi, king of Babylon, styles himself “king of Padan and of Alman ” ( = Arman, cf. Padan-Aram : Gen. xxviii. 2) 1350 B.C. Pudi-ilu, king of Assyria, conquers the Akhlami, an Aramean tribe. TABLES xvii 1150 B.C. Ashur-rish-ishi overthrows “the wide-spread host of the Akhlami.” 1120 B.C. Tiglathpileser I. speaks of “the Aramean Akhlami the foes of Ashur ” as extending from the country of the Shuhites to Carchemish. 1050 B.C. Saul fights against the Aramean “kings of Zobah ” : 1 Sam. xiv. 47. 1010 B.C. David smites the Arameans of Syria, Damascus, and Aram-naharaim : 2 Sam. viii. 3-5, and Ps. lx. title. 885-860 B.C. Ashurnatsirpal conquers Bit Adini (cf. 2 Kings xix. 12) and other Aramean states on the Middle Euphrates. 850 B.C. Aramaic inscription of Zakir king of Hamath. 770-730 B.C. Aramaic inscriptions ©f the kings of Samahla on the E. slope of Amanus, and a little N. of the N.E. angle of the Mediterranean. 7 45 B.C. Tiglathpileser III. speaks of “ the land of the Arameans ” as extending from the Tigris to where the Uknu (the river of Shushan) falls into the Persian Gulf, and mentions Aramean tribes conquered by him whose territories extended to the Median border. 744 B.C. Tiglathpileser transports 65,000 Medes and Arameans to other parts of the empire. 722 B.C. Sargon places captive Israelites among the Arameans on the Khabur, and in “ the cities of the Medes ” : 2 Kings xvii. 6. 536 B.C. The Aramaic of Daniel, interspersed with twenty Old Persian w'ords. 471-411 B.C. The Jews of Elephantine write in Aramaic closely resembling the Aramaic of the Book of Daniel. TABLE III ^ j To show the contact of Assyria , Babylonia , and Egypt with the Asiatic Greeks for over a century before the age of Daniel. 715 B.C. Sargon clears the E. Levant of Greek pirates: Cylinder Inscr ., line 21. 711 B.C. A Greek king in Ashdod : Kliorsabad Inscr., line 95. 707 B.C. Seven kings of Cyprus send presents to Sargon at Babylon : Ibid . line }9$. i B xviii TABLES 698 B.C. Sennacherib, to keep open the trade route, encounters the Greeks in Cilicia, and builds an “ Athenian temple ” at Tarsus : Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the Br. Museum , pt. xxvi. 697 B.C. Sennacherib employs Greek captives to build him a fleet on the Tigris : Bull Inscr ., No. 4, lines 56-60. 674 B.C. Ten kings of Cyprus — nine of them with Greek names — send materials to build Esarhaddon’s palace at Nineveh : Esar - haddon, Cylinder B , col. 5, lines 19-27. 664 B.C. Greeks help Psammetichus I. of Egypt to conquer the Dodekarchy. In return he uses Greek mercenaries, and plants two camps of them at Daphnse on either side of the Pelusiac branch of the Nile : Berod. bk. ii. 152, 154. 605 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar, after his campaign against Egypt, plants colonies in Babylonia, consisting of Jews, Phenicians, Syrians, and “of the nations belonging to Egypt”: Joseph, c. Apion, bk. i. 19. 595 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar, rebuilding the Old Palace at Babylon, employs Greek architectural decorations on the fagade of the throne-room : Koldewey’s Excavations , pp. 104, 105, and plate opposite p. 130. 587 B.C. In the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar (according to the LXX.), three instruments with Greek names are found in the king’s band amongst “ all kinds of music ” : Dan. iii. 5. 4 IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION WITH the spread of learning and the issue from time to time of fresh commentaries on the Book of Daniel, it is now a matter of common knowledge that two very different views are held respecting that Book, which, for the sake of a name, may be styled respectively the orthodox and the critical — not that all critics are on the same side, but 'simply that the majority of modem critics incline to the latter view. They may also be styled the Boman and the Grecian, according to the scheme of interpreta¬ tion adopted with regard to the Four Kingdoms in the vision of Daniel, chaps, ii. and vii. In a book written in defence of the orthodox position it may be well to devote the first chapter to explaining the main difficulty which confronts the upholders of that position, and to showing how that difficulty may be met with¬ out having recourse to the solution proposed by the critics — a solution which does great violence to the Book of Daniel as a whole, and creates more difficulties than it removes. According to the orthodox view, the Book of Daniel is a narrative of some surprising events that happened in the life of a saintly Jewish captive, holding a very high position at the courts of Babylon and of Persia, a fragmentary biography of one who was a special favourite of heaven, including visions such as have been granted to no other man, except possibly the beloved apostle — visions reaching to the end of time. Thus viewed, this Book occupies a unique position in the Old Testament, and as such it was treated by the Founder of Christianity, for there is no other Book of the Old Testament to which Christ pays greater honour than to this Book of Daniel. The estimate, however, of this Book formed by the critics is something far different. To them it appears as one of the Pseudepigrapha, or Jewish religious l 2 IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL books, written under a false, or rather an assumed name, which appeared in the second and first centuries B.C., such as the Book of Enoch and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. They would probably confess it to be the most remarkable of those books, the noblest and the loftiest in its teaching, the grandest in its scope no less than in its descriptions, a literary work of super¬ lative merit ; but at the same time a merely human composition. To put the matter in another light, the critics look upon the Book of Daniel as a religious novel, resting upon a shadowy back¬ ground of history, written about 164 B.C. in the troublous days of the Maccabees, and written with this noble intention, viz. to encourage the faithful in a time of persecution and to support them under very severe trials. Accordingly they see much in this Book that meets with their approval, and are fully awake to its literary beauties. But, all the same, it is in their eyes a mere work of the imagination, cleverly put together, but containing not a few historical inaccuracies, owing to its having been written some three or four hundred years after the times which it describes. To them, therefore, its great facts are pure fancies ; its mighty miracles, mere feats of the imagination ; its so-called prophecies, past history clothed with the garb of prophecy — a favourite practice in the apocalypses of the Pseudepigrapha. If this view of the matter be the correct one, the puzzle is, How did this Book of Daniel come to be included in the sacred Canon of the Old Testament ? and how came it to be treated by our Lord Jesus Christ with such special honour ? The question is altogether such an important one that we may well ask on what ground the critical view is based. And here it is not sufficient to answer that the critics as a body believe neither in miracle nor in prophecy. This doubtless is the case with some, but it is not the whole truth of the matter. To understand their position aright we must turn to the long and striking prophecy of Daniel, chap, xi., which foretells the sufferings of the Jewish people under the Greek empire of Syria, more particu¬ larly in the days of Antiochus the Great and his son Antiochus Epiphanes. This chapter is the great crux of the Book of Daniel, and on the remarkable features presented by it the critics base an argument, which at first sight seems unanswerable, to show that the Book was written, as stated above, in or about the vear 164 B.C. This argument is admirably set forth by the late Prof. Driver in his Commentary on Daniel. Speaking of chap. xi. Dr. Driver says, “ The minuteness of the predictions, embracing even special events in the distant future, is out of harmony with the analogy of prophecy.” This is certainly true, for we do not INTRODUCTION a find such detailed prophecies in Isaiah, Jeremiah, or Zechariah ; and yet such an argument, taken alone, is not of itself fatal to the authenticity of a Book which in some respects is unique. Bor surely it may well be granted that the Almighty Ruler of the world knows the end from the beginning, and can, if He sees fit, unfold with minuteness the events even of a far- distant future. The real difficulty is explained by Dr. Driver in the following words : “ While down to the period of Antiochus’ persecution the actual facts are described with surprising distinctness, after this point the distinctness ceases : the closing events of Antiochus’ own life are, to all appearance, not described as they actually occurred.” 1 We venture to think that any honest critic who has studied the matter will be ready to endorse this statement. Thus, in chap. xi. 21-39 we find described many events in Antiochus’ remarkable career, e.g. his coming into the kingdom by stealth and gaining power by flattery, v. 21 ; his lavish prodigality, v. 24 ; his two expeditions against Egypt (the second, owing to the interposition of the Romans, terminating so differently from the first), vv. 25-80 ; his persecution of the Jews when returning from his first Egyptian expedition, v. 28 ; his attempt to put down and stamp out the temple worship when returning crest¬ fallen from his second expedition, v. 31 ; the early triumphs of the Maccabees, v. 34 ; the assumption by Antiochus of divine honours during the later years of his reign, when he appears on coins as “Antiochus, the God Manifest,” v. 36; and, finally, the special honours paid by him to Jupiter Capitolinus, “ the god of fortresses,” vv. 88, 39. But when we pass over the evident pause at the close of this 39th verse, this distinctness ceases, and we make what Prof. Charles styles “ a transition from history to prophecy ” 2 : prophecy which fits in very badly if we restrict and apply it to the closing events of Antiochus’ career. Thus, nothing is known from secular history of any further invasion of Egypt such as is described in vv. 40-42 ; whilst Antiochus him¬ self, so far from “ having power over the treasures of gold and of silver and over all the precious things of Egypt,” v. 43, was in sore financial straits towards the close of his life, and died, not in the Holy Land, as v. 45 seems to imply, but in Elymais, after a fruitless attempt to rob a temple of its treasures. If, then, we take these closing verses, 40-45, to apply to Antiochus Epiphanes, they appear before us as a prophecy that was never fulfilled ; in fact as nothing more than a vain surmise. From the above phenomena the critics have drawn the very evident conclusion 1 Cambridge Bible , Daniel, Introduction, p. lxvi, 3 Century Bible , Daniel, p. 136. 4 IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL that this seeming prophecy was written just at the point of time where it begins to fail of accomplishment, so that verses 1-39 are nothing more than past history put into the garb of prophecy, and verses 40-45 a speculation on the part of the author as to what he thought likely to happen in the immediate future. At first sight the above argument seems unanswerable, since it certainly meets the great difficulty presented by this chapter. But it is certain nevertheless that it cannot be the true solution of that difficulty, since, however well it may solve the riddle of chap, xi., we are forced, if we accept it, to do the greatest violence to the rest of the Book. The critics, allowing themselves to be guided by conclusions based on this closing prophecy, use, if one may so say, the tail to waggle the dog, and whenever this is done the dog perforce must exhibit the most unnatural contortions. Thus, then, having arrived at the firm conviction, based on the phenomena presented by chap, xi., that the Book was written about 164 B.C., the critics proceed to make everything fit in with this theory, and treat all the other visions of this Book as so much past history put into the form of Jewish apocalyptic. Hence it follows that the four kingdoms of chap. ii. in their eyes cannot be Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome, but must be Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece, seeing that in 164 B.C. Rome, though on her way to greatness, had not yet developed into a world power. By this wrenching asunder of Media and Persia great violence is done to chap, viii., where the unity of the Medo- Persian kingdom is so distinctly affirmed, first in the vision, where it appears as a ram with two horns of which the higher is seen springing up last, and secondly in the words of the inter¬ preting angel, “ The ram which thou sawest that had the two horns, they are the kings of Media and Persia.” Another striking instance of the same thing is found in the treatment dealt out by the critics to the Evangelic prophecy of chap, ix., a prophecy remarkable beyond all others for its exact chronological precision. In endeavouring to make this prophecy fit in with their views they are obliged to admit an error of no less than 67 years in the prophet’s reckoning, which they un- blushingly ascribe to the writer’s faulty information on points of past history ! 1 Other examples of forced interpretation will be given in the course of the next chapter, but enough has been adduced to show that by accepting this view of the critics, derived from the singular phenomena of chap, xi., we only plunge our¬ selves into far greater and graver difficulties than those which 1 Century Bible , Daniel, p. 107. INTRODUCTION confront the orthodox expositor. It is best, then, to turn our attention to another explanation of that remarkable chapter, put forward by the late Dr. C. H. H. Wright in his scholarly work on the prophecies of the Book of Daniel. Dr. Wright maintains that Dan. chap. xi. is of the nature of a paraphrase or targum, in which a genuine prophecy of Daniel lies embedded.1 In other words, a genuine prophecy is here interpolated and overlaid by real or supposed fulfilments. These interpolations and additions continue down to the end of verse 39, after which we have the original prophecy, copied out pure and simple without any paraphrase, down to its close at chap. xii. 4. Now, it is owing to these interpolations in the first thirty-nine verses of chap. xi. that we naturally look upon the closing verses, viz. 40-45, as a continued description of the events which are to happen in the career of Antiochus Epiphanes ; whereas it seems more likely, on further investigation, that these last verses, forming a part of the original prophecy of Daniel, contain an ideal picture of the overthrow of the heathen Greek-Syrian power on the mountains of Israel — a picture called up before the mind of the seer by Isaiah’s prophecy of the overthrow of the host of Sennacherib in Jehovah’s land and upon His mountains. Thus regarded, the prophecy of verses 40-45 certainly received its fulfilment. It was in the little commonwealth of Judah, and in the days of the Maccabees, that God “ chose the weak things of the world to put to shame the things that are strong, and the things that are not to bring to nought the things that are.” 2 In the words of Dr. Wright, “ The last and final overthrow of Greece, as a world- power antagonistic to truth and to God, took place on the mountains of Judea.” 3 The above explanation as to the earlier and larger part of chap. xi. having been interpolated will come as a surprise to many. In the first place, it certainly contains a concession to the argu¬ ment of the critics. Dr. Wright himself admits that “ the closing prophecy of Daniel, in its present form , cannot be proved to go back to an earlier period than 164 B.C. ” ; while he very wisely adds that “it by no means follows that such a statement is true with regard to the Book of Daniel as a whole.” 4 In the second place, it will strike some minds that Holy Scripture has here been tampered with, and certainly the allegation is true ; and yet it is easily accounted for, if we regard the peculiar circumstances 1 Daniel and his Prophecies, pp. 314, 315, 318. 2 1 Cor. i. 27. 3 Daniel and his Prophecies, p. 318. 4 Ibid. p. 318. 6 IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL under which the Book of Daniel has been handed down to us. As noticed above, this Book is of a fragmentary nature, probably a book of extracts from some larger work. It gives us certain passages from the life of the seer and his friends, with his own account of his visions appended. Two of these visions, viz. those of chaps, viii. and xi., are found to be very closely connected both in subject-matter and in the language employed. They are evidently from the pen of the same author. Now, in both of these chapters the religious persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes figure largely. This would make the original work, from which we may suppose our present Book to have been taken, an object of especial detestation to the persecuting party, whose evil deeds are therein so clearly foretold. When they rent in pieces the Books of the Law, it is hardly likely that they would spare that Book which foretells so plainly their unrighteous doings.1 So, then, like some noble cathedral which still bears the marks of the rough treatment which it received at the hands of Cromwell’s soldiers, this sacred and venerable Book still shows some evident signs of its having come through the wars. In this way, and no other, can we explain the two languages in which it has come down to us. Chaps, i. to ii. 3, and viii. to xii. are written in Hebrew ; while the central portion of the Book, viz. ii. 4 to the end of vii., is in Aramaic, as is explained by the words “ in Aramaic,” inserted in the text of ii. 4, just as in the last clause of Ezra iv. 7.2 The fact that the change of language in chap. ii. occurs in the very middle of a narrative is proof that the docu¬ ments used were imperfect. Either the Hebrew copy was used to supplement the Aramaic, or the Aramaic to supplement the Hebrew. Further, it is deserving of notice that in the opinion of most scholars the Book was originally written in Aramaic. In the words of Dr. Charles, “ the Aramaic section of Daniel does not give the impression of a translation, and nowhere points to a Hebrew original ; the Hebrew sections, on the other hand, favour the hypothesis of an Aramaic original, since they contain frequent Aramaisms.” 3 The eleventh chapter of Daniel is, then, in the first place, a translation from the original ; and, in the second place, it is a translation that has been added to by way of interpolation ; and to this is due the form in which it has come down to us. What has happened to the Greek Septuagint 1 See 1 Macc. i. 56. 2 Both in Dan. ii. 4, and in Ezra iv. 7, the words “ in Aramaic ” ought to be written in italics in the middle of a space left blank. 8 Dr. Charles is quoting the opinion of Marti and Wright, in which he himself concurs. Century Bible, Daniel, p. xxv. INTRODUCTION 7 translation has happened also to the Hebrew translation of chap. xi. ; it has been added to, and the nature of the additions resembles to some extent the expository comments which we meet with in the Hebrew Targums. The writers of the Targums, or ancient Aramaic commentaries on the Scriptures of the Old Testament, loved to introduce into Scripture prophecies fulfilments, actual or supposed, in such a way that they appear as parts of the original prophecy. “ In such paraphrases,” writes Dr. Wright, “ phrases of the original are retained, although often so modified and obscured by expository comments that if we possessed only the Targum it would be often impossible to restore the original text.” 1 Thus, in the Targum of Onkelos, the Blessing of Dan, Gen. xlix. 16-18, is made to include a prophecy of the exploits of Samson, which runs thus : “ From the house of Dan will be chosen, and will arise, a man in whose days his people shall be delivered, and in whose years the tribes of Israel shall have rest together. A chosen man wfill arise from the house of Dan, the terror of whom shall fall upon the peoples, who will smite the Philistines with strength as the serpent, the deadly serpent lurking by the way ; he will smite the might of the Philistine host, the horsemen with the foot, he will weaken the horses and chariots and throw their riders back¬ wards. For thy salvation have I waited, 0 Lord.” 2 Similarly, in the Palestinian Targum the blessing given to Abraham in Gen. xii. 8, “ I will bless them that bless thee, and him that curseth thee will I curse, and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed,” is paraphrased thus : “ I will bless the priests who spread forth their hands in prayer, and Balaam who will curse thee, I will curse, and they shall slay him with the mouth of the sword : and in thee shall be blessed all the genera¬ tions of the earth.” For another example of definite fulfilments introduced into the broad outlines of the original prophecy, take the blessing given by Isaac to Jacob, Gen. xxvii. 29, as we find it paraphrased in the Palestinian Targum : “ Let peoples be subject to thee, all the sons of Esau, and kingdoms bend before thee, all the sons of Keturah, a chief and a ruler be thou over thy brethren, and let the sons of thy mother salute thee. Let them who curse thee, my son, be accursed as Balaam the son of Beor, and those 1 Daniel and his Prophecies , p. 253. 2 The Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the Pentateuch , translated into English by J. VV. Etheridge, London, 1862. 8 IN AND AROUND THE ROOK OF DANIEL who bless thee be blessed, as Moses the prophet, the scribe of Israel.” One other instance, of some interest to us as forming an early exemplification of the two systems of interpretation of the Four Kingdoms of Daniel, chap, ii., serves at the same time to exhibit the extravagances of some of these Jewish paraphrases. I allude to the words of Gen. xv. 12 : “ And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abraham, and lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.” In the Palestinian Targum this passage is paraphrased thus : “ And when the sun was nearing to set, a deep sleep was thrown upon Abraham, and behold four kingdoms rose to enslave his children : Horror, which is Babylon ; Darkness, which is Media ; Greatness, which is Javan (Greece) ; Falling, which is Persia, which is to fall and to have no uplifting.” In the Jerusalem Targum the interpretation runs on similar lines, while the four kingdoms are identified with Babylon, Media (Medo-Persia), Greece, and Edom (Rome). Similar interpola¬ tions to those in the Targums are met with in the Peshitto or ancient Syriac version of the Book of Daniel. According to Wright, they are sometimes written in red ink, but appear in the London polyglot without any distinction of ink. In this version Dan. xi. 6 reads thus : “ And at the end of years they shall agree (the daughter of Ptolemy he has given to Alexander the brother of Antiochus and Peter), and the daughter of the king of the south shall go to the king of the north (Alexander went and took Petra the daughter of Ptolemy to be his wife) to make peace between them (and Ptolemy came against Alexander his son-in-law to kill him), and there shall be no strength in her because of fear that she shall fear (and the daughter of Ptolemy she shall be given to Deme¬ trius after Alexander her husband is dead), and she shall be handed over, she and her bringers and her maidens and her strengtheners at that time.” In one respect it will be noticed that there is a very marked difference between the interpolated prophecy of Daniel, chap, xi., and the examples quoted from the Targums and the Peshitto. In the prophecy there is an entire absence of proper names, whereby a slightly obscuring veil is drawn over the different incidents. In the Targums and the Peshitto, on the other hand, all is made plain, definite, and specific. In this respect Dan. xi. resembles the Jewish Pseudepigrapha rather than the Targums. This is just what might be expected, since the interpolations date, as we have seen, from about 164 B.C., and were therefore made in the age of the Pseudepigrapha. INTRODUCTION 9 Before we pass on from the difficulties presented by Daniel’s latest vision, it will be well to direct attention to the words of the revealing angel, spoken at the close of that vision : “ But thou, 0 Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end : many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” “ Shut up the words ” : the angel is speaking, not merely of this one vision, but of all the visions shown to Daniel in this Book. This may be gathered from chap. x. 1, with which the vision opens, which should be rendered thus : “In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia, a word was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar, and the word was true, even a great warfare : and he understood the word, and had understanding of the vision.” This last clause shows that the expressions “ word ” and “ vision ” are synonymous, as appears also from the last clause of chap. ix. 23, “ therefore consider the word 1 and understand the vision.” “ The two expressions ‘ word ’ and * vision,’ ” writes Dr. Charles, “ mean practically the same thing, denoting its twofold relation, in regard to God and in regard to man.” 2 But if “ word ” is thus equivalent to “ vision,” then the use of the plural “ words ” in xii. 4, shows that the angel is speaking, not only of the vision in chaps, x.-xii., but of all Daniel’s visions, including that of chap, ii., which was shown to Daniel as well as to Nebuchadnezzar,3 and that we are justified in understanding the words “ Seal the book,” to apply to all the seer’s recorded visions, and in some sense to the whole Book of Daniel so far as it contains aught that is puzzling and mysterious. This wider sense of the words is warranted by the fact that the angel’s words come at the close of the Book of Daniel as it has been preserved to us. In chap. xii. 4, Daniel is told to “ Shut up the words and seal the book.” Then, a little farther on, in verse 9, we read, “ Go thy way, Daniel : for the words are shut up and sealed till the time of the end.” The two statements seem to conflict, but the meaning is, that Daniel is to roll up and seal his scrolls of vision, first as being completed and requiring safe keeping, since it would be a long, long time before they would be fulfilled ; and secondly, as a symbolic act, indicating that in the Divine intention those visions were — if one may use such a paradox — hidden revelations, which would not be made plain till the far-off time of their fulfil¬ ment. “ I heard, but I understood not,” is the seer’s own com¬ plaint, xii. 8. And again, in viii. 27, when his vision had been 1 R.V. “ matter." 2 Century Bible , note on Dan. ix. 23. 5 Dan. ii. 19. 10 IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL explained to him, he says, sadly, evidently including himself in the statement, “ I was astonished at the vision, but none under¬ stood it,” i.e. none fully comprehended it, indeed none could until the day of its fulfilment. How much more would this be the case with this last vision ! What commentator, even in this enlightened age, has been able to show the -meaning of the mystic 1290 days and 1335 days ? Clearly these and other mysteries will remain hidden till the time of their fulfilment. It follows, then, that the best commentary on Daniel xii. 4 and 9, is that offered by Isa. xxix. 11 : “ And all vision is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee : and he saith, I cannot, for it is sealed : and the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee : and he saith, I am not learned.” In the deep things of God the greatest doctor and the most illiterate believer stand in exactly the same position : both are alike unable to explain them. It was a grief to Daniel that he could not understand the visions vouchsafed to him, therefore in vv. 9 and 13 the angel says kindly to him, “ Go thy way,” or, as it is rendered in Theo- dotion’s translation of v. 9, “ Come hither, Daniel.” Also in v. 4, by way of comfort, he is assured that during the long interval between the time of his receiving the visions and the time of their accomplishment “ many shall run to and fro and knowledge shall be increased.” It is his special honour to have received from heaven the most sublime and astonishing visions, which shall engage the attention of many devout students, whose labours as time goes on shall not be unrewarded. Here was comfort for the prophet, and here, likewise, is a stimulus to those who apply themselves to the study of his writings. The Hebrew word for “ run to and fro ” denotes earnest vigilance and scrutiny, with a fixed object. Thus, “ the eyes of the Lord run to and fro through the whole earth,” Zech. iv. 10, taking knowledge of, and paying the closest attention to, all that is going on. So, too, in Jer. v. 1, the same word is used, when the prophet directs a diligent search to be made throughout the streets of Jerusalem to see if there is one upright, honest man left. There also lies in the Hebrew root the idea of quick glancing motion, as in the strokes of a whip and the lashing of the water with oars. Here it is used of the quick motion of the eye glancing across the written page.1 1 From the root city are derived nitf “ a whip,” and “ rowing,” as whipping or lashing the water. INTRODUCTION 11 “ Many shall run to and fro ” : as in the case of other Books of Holy Scripture, notably the Book of Isaiah, so in the case of this Book of Daniel, the extraordinary number of commentaries con¬ stantly issuing from the press bears witness to the intrinsic worth of the original prophecy. One stands amazed before the vast bibliography given by Wright in the Introduction to Daniel and its Critics. To this, then, already well-fulfilled prediction is added the promise, “ knowledge shall be increased a promise which the writer ventures to think is also being fulfilled in the vast development of knowledge with respect to the times of the prophet Daniel, opened up through the progress of cuneiform discovery. Thus, to quote some instances, the inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar, as now made known, bear witness to the truth¬ fulness of the picture of that monarch given us in this Book of Daniel, and are even a voucher for its being the work of a contem¬ porary. The “ Chaldeans ” of this Book are now identified as the priests of the god Bel, men who formed the elite of Babylonian society. Belshazzar, whose very existence was long doubted of, stands before us as the energetic son of Nabonidus, the last king of Babylon, and one of Dr. Pinches’ latest discoveries shows that he was associated with his father in the sovereignty. Darius the Mede, despite the difficulty caused by his age as given in chap. v. 81, appears to the writer to be none other than Cambyses the son of Cyrus, who, in the first year after the capture of Babylon, reigned for some ten months as king of Babylon, being probably intended by his father to succeed Belshazzar. A fairly good case can also be made out for Gobryas. This view is adopted by Dr. Pinches ; the former one by the celebrated Assyriologist Winckler.1 The circumstances of the capture of the royal palace in Babylon, as described in chap, v., are found to be in complete agreement with the details given us on the Annalistic Tablet of Cyrus. Finally, the foreign words which occur in the Book of Daniel, and which formed such a stumbling-block to the late Prof. Driver, appear rather to form a powerful proof of the genuineness of this Book, a voucher in fact that its author occupied a position such as was actually held by Daniel at the court of Persia at the close of his long life. In all these respects, which will be dealt with at large in the following pages, the writer sees a wonderful fulfilment of the promise, “ knowledge shall be increased ” : and it is this conviction, along with his deep love for so sublime a Book, that has led him to undertake a task, 1 See Pinches' Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records of Assyria and Babylonia , p. 419, and Winckler in Schrader’s Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament, p. 288. 12 IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL congenial enough in itself, but not unattended with difficulties. May the Divine Angel, who stands “ above the waters of the river,” 1 be pleased to use this work to stem the rising tide of destructive criticism : or, if it should be His will to let that tide rise yet higher, may it speedily, in the prophet’s words, “ over¬ flow and pass through.” 2 And if this should be so, it will not be the first time that such a thing has happened in the annals of Biblical Criticism. 1 Dan. xii. 6. 2 Isa. viii. 8, quoted in Dan. xi. 10 and 40. / CHAPTER II the four kingdoms (Dan. ii., vii., and viii.) REFERENCE has already been made at the beginning of Chapter I. to the two main schemes of interpretation of the Book of Daniel and their bearing on the question of the Four Kingdoms of Daniel, chaps, ii. and vii. The matter may be best presented to our readers by placing it before them in tabular form as follows : — GRECIAN SCHEME Chap. II Chap. VII Chap. VIII Golden head. =Lion with eagle's wings. = Ba bylonian • Empire. Silver breast and arms. = Bear with three ribs, etc. — First and shorter horn of the ram. = Median Empire. Brazen belly and thighs. — Leopard with four wings. = Second and longer horn of the ram. = Persian Empire. Iron legs, with feet and toes partly iron, part¬ ly clay. = Beast with iron teeth and ten horns. = Goat with one horn fol¬ lowed by four horns. = Greek Empire of Alexander and his successors. Little horn which sprang up among the ten horns. = Little horn which sprang out of one of the four horns. = Antiochus Epi- phanes. 13 14 IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL ROMAN SCHEME Chap. II Chap. VII CHAP. VIII Golden head. = Lion with eagle’s wings. = Babylonian Empire. Silver breast and arms. = Bear with three ribs, etc. = Ram with two horns. = Medo - Persian Empire. Brazen belly and thighs. = Leopard with four wings. « = Goat with one horn followed by four horns. = Greek Empire of Alexander and his successors. Little horn which sprang out of one of the four horns. = Antioohus Epi- phanes. Iron legs, with feet and toes partly iron, partly clay. = Beast with iron teeth and ten horn3. * = Roman Empire. Little horn which sprang up among the ten horns and uprooted three of them. = The temporal power of the Papacy. Some of the difficulties which beset the Grecian scheme have already been touched on. It will, however, be necessary to go into them more at length in the course of the present chapter. The advocates of this scheme, as will be evident from the tabular statement just given, look upon chaps, vii. and viii. as parallel visions, saving that chap. viii. leaves out the Babylonian Empire, which was on the point of passing away at the time when the vision was shown to Daniel. According to the advocates of the Roman scheme these chapters are not parallels. In their view the vision of chap. vii. takes a much wider range than that of chap, viii., alike geographically and historically, embracing both the Roman Empire and an entirely fresh power which was to spring up after the disintegration of that empire : whilst the vision of chap. viii. is mainly concerned with a development of the Greek-Syrian kingdom and the sufferings apd persecutions THE FOUR KINGDOMS 15 entailed thereby on the little Jewish community in Palestine. To put it shortly, chap. vii. is in their eyes a world- vision, chap. viii. only a Jewish vision. In working out an imaginary parallelism between chaps, vii. and viii. the Grecian critics, if we may so call them, are forced to equate the ram of chap. viii. with the bear and the leopard of chap, vii., that so the ram may stand for two empires, the Median and the Persian, which they affirm to be represented as distinct empires in this Book of Daniel. This, surely, is a very curious piece of criticism, for why should the visions of this Book represent these supposed two empires by two beasts in chap. vii. and by only one beast in chap. viii. ? May it not be said to such inter¬ preters — not irreverently — “ those whom the seer hath joined together, let not his critics put asunder.” Since Media and Persia are so evidently “ one flesh ” in the vision of chap, viii., no less than in the history of chaps, v. and vi., why should they be parted in the vision of chap. vii. ? Another point in this forced parallelism is the identifying the “ little horn ” of chap. vii. 8, with the “ little horn ” of chap. viii. 9, It is true that both are persecuting powers, that both for awhile “ practise and prosper,” and that both magnify themselves against God ; but there the likeness ceases. Fundamentally these two powers are quite different. The little horn of chap. vii. is a fresh power springing up among already existing powers, and in some way different from them, able also ere long to uproot three of them and to take their place. The little horn of chap, viii., on the other hand, is described as a horn springing out of a horn, i.e. it represents, not a fresh power, nor a different kind of power, but a fresh development of an already existing power. Observe also that nothing is said of its uprooting and superseding any other powers. As regards interpretation, the advocates of the Greek system see in the little horn of chap. vii. and that of chap. viii. one and the same persecuting power, identifying both with Antiochus Epiphanes. To the advocates of the Roman system the little horn of chap. vii. appears as a new and different kind of power, springing up among the ten kingdoms into which the Roman Empire, in its Roman part as distinct from its Greek and Asiatic provinces, was presently to be divided, and is generally interpreted of the temporal power, so cleverly and craftily ac¬ quired, and so sternly and ruthlessly exercised by the Bishops of Rome. On the other hand, they regard the little horn springing out of a horn, described in chap, viii., as a fresh development of the Greek-Syrian kingdom, when under Antiochus Epiphanes and his two immediate successors it became a persecuting power. c 16 IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL Also, before we leave the subject, there is one other point deserving of notice. The English reader must needs be warned that the Aramaic for “ little horn ” in chap. vii. and the Hebrew for “ little horn ” in chap. viii. are not equivalents. In chap. vii. 8, the Aramaic is correctly rendered “ another horn, a little one,” in the R.V. But in viii. 9, the Hebrew is remarkable, and admits of two renderings : either “ a horn less than littleness,” i.e. “ a very little horn ” ; or, “ a horn from littleness,” i.e. arising from a small beginning, an expression which lays emphasis on its growth. A third and equally faulty piece of criticism lies in the treatment meted out by the advocates of the Grecian scheme to the ten horns seen on the head of the fourth beast in chap. vii. These are regarded by them as denoting ten successive kings of Syria ; whereas, according to the analogy of the vision in chap. viii. — where the four “ notable horns,” which take tho place of the “ great horn ” on the head of the he-goat, represent four co-existing powers — they should rather be regarded as contem¬ poraneous, If succession were intended, it would be indicated, as in the case of the Medo-Persian ram, where one horn is seen to spring up after the other. Indeed, it may safely be said that when succession is intended it is always clearly indicated, either in tho vision itself by one object appearing after another, or in the interpretation by plain statements admitting of inferences based thereon. Thus, in the vision of chap, ii., though the Four Kingdoms are symbolically presented in the great image at one and the same time, yet the interpretation plainly states that they are succes¬ sive, and that as we descend from the head to the feet we are really descending through the course of the ages, so that in this case the inference is a sound one that the iron legs, and feet and toes of “ iron mixed with miry clay,” represent respectively an earlier and later stage of the fourth kingdom, the toes represent¬ ing the latest stage of all. But apart from these faults of detail, the greatest error of the critics lies in their blind endeavour to cramp the grand world¬ wide vision of chap. vii. within the narrow Jewish limits of the vision of chap. viii. In some strange way the writers who advocate the Grecian scheme appear to have completely overlooked the utterly different character of these two visions. In proof of this, notice how the scene of vision in chap, viii., which is at first fairly wide, taking in the great contest for world-power between Persia and Greece, or, as one might say, between East and West, very rapidly contracts to much smaller limits, till it is focussed on the persecution raging in little Palestine, the “ glorious land.” Henceforth the vision is concerned, not with world-powers, but THE FOUR KINGDOMS 17 with the Jewish theocracy and ritual ; the atmosphere and colouring become strongly local and Levitical ; mention is made of the “ host of heaven,” “ the stars,” 1 the “ Prince of the host,” the “ continual burnt-offering ,” 2 the “ sanctuary and the host ” — mark the conjunction — and time is reckoned in the Jewish fashion by so many “ evenings and mornings.” 3 In the vision of chap, vii., on the other hand, the theatre of vision is not only wide at the commencement, but remains so throughout, and is, if anything, widest at the close. No reference whatever is made in that chapter to the land of the Jews or to their sanctuary or ritual. It is true we read of “ the saints,” “ the saints of the Most High ” 4 — a wider term by far than “ the Prince of the host ” — and of a persecutor, who thinks “ to change the times and the law ” ; but we are under no necessity to understand these words in a narrow Jewish sense, for all local colouring is absent. Then, too, the mode of reckoning a period by “ a time and times and a half time,” chap. vii. 25, is not distinctively Jewish, since a similar expression is used of Nebuchadnezzar’s madness, which was to last for “ seven times,” chap. iv. 16. Further, the expres¬ sions used to describe the kingdom of “ one like unto a son of man,” in chap. vii. 14, cannot be restricted to any merely Jewish kingdom, however widely extended, but must be placed side by side with the statements made respecting the same Divine king¬ dom, first by Daniel when interpreting the dream of Nebuchad¬ nezzar, chap. ii. 44, and secondly by the king himself when recovering from his madness, chap. iv. 84 ; while the mention of “ the peoples, nations, and languages,” chap. vii. 14, carries our thoughts, not to the kingdom of a David or even of a Solomon, but to the then empire of Babylon, with which the kingdom of the God of heaven is both compared and contrasted. Lastly, notice the strong contrast presented by the close of these two visions. The vision of chap. viii. ends with the cleansing of the sanctuary, verse 14 ; whilst that of chap. vii. widens out into a kingdom embracing all nations, and which is to last for ever ; 1 Israel were to be as many as the starry host, Gen. xv. 5, Jer. xxxiii. 22. 2 The word “ burnt -offering " is absent in the original. “ The continual," Hebrew TZ?J?n, included besides the daily burnt-offering, the offering of incense in the Holy Place, Exod. xxx. 8, the lighting the lamps, Lev. xxiv. 2, the placing of the shewbread on the table, Lev. xxiv. 8, and the meal-offering. Lev. vi. 20. As all these, with the exception of the shewbread, were attended to daily, it would be better, as Wright suggests, to substitute for “the continual burnt-offering," “the daily service." 3 Gen. i. 5 ; the Jewish day commenced at sunset. 4 Even Nebuchadnezzar, a heathen, speaks of the “Most High God," Dan. iii. 2G, and iv. 2, and Daniel speaks to him in similar terms, iv. 24, and also to Belshazzar, v. 18. 18 IN AND AROUND THE BOOK OF DANIEL in the words of the interpreting angel, v. 27, “ the kingdom, and the dominion, and the greatness of the kingdoms ” — note the plural — “ under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High ; his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.” In view of the above considerations, it will, I think, be admitted that the critics who attempt to make chap. viii. run parallel to chap. vii. are attempting an impossibility. There is, however, one genuine difficulty presented by the Roman scheme which demands our attention. I refer to the description given by Daniel of the second kingdom, when explaining to Nebuchad¬ nezzar the meaning of the composite image seen by that monarch in his dream. The seer’s words are : “ After thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee.” 1 This statement that the second kingdom would be inferior to the first is agreeable — so the Grecian critics tell us — to the belief that the writer of this Book was under the idea that a weak Median kingdom followed the Babylonian, and in proof of this they point to the parallel vision of chap, vii., where the bear in their judgment represents a power inferior to that represented by the lion. As regards this pro¬ nouncement of the inferiority of the bear compared to the lion, the prophet Amos, a simple countryman, will join issue with them. Amos had rather meet a lion than a bear. “ The Syrian bear,” says Dr. Horton,2 “ is fiercer than the lion.” But apart from this question of natural history, the description of the second kingdom, given in Dan. vii. 5, carries with it no suggestion what¬ ever of inferiority to the first as regards strength, but rather the reverse : “ Behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it was raised up on one side, and three ribs were in his mouth between his teeth : and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.” It is the voracity of the bear, not its inferiority to the lion, that is here emphasised. Aristotle calls the bear Z^ov 7rafi